Baucom v. Novant Health, Inc., 3:22-cv-00662

Baucom, a registered nurse, had rotator cuff surgery on March 9, 2020, sought a reassignment/accommodation for lifting restrictions upon returning in July 2020, and was denied; she later took leave and was terminated February 8, 2021 for failure to return to work.
Baucom filed an EEOC charge on November 25, 2020 (disability discrimination), added two amendments (March 2, 2021; October 4, 2021) concerning ADA/disability and termination, and alleges a third amendment (January 27, 2022) asserting race discrimination.
The EEOC’s determination (May 24, 2022) and Notice of Rights (September 14, 2022) addressed disability discrimination; the record contains no indication the EEOC considered race in its decision.
Baucom filed suit December 12, 2022 asserting ADA discrimination and failure to accommodate, Title VII race discrimination, § 1981 race discrimination, and a state wrongful-discharge claim; Novant moved to partially dismiss the Title VII and § 1981 claims under Rule 12(b)(6).
The court concluded Baucom failed to exhaust administrative remedies for her Title VII race claim (the third EEOC amendment did not relate back) and failed to plead but-for causation for her § 1981 claim, and therefore granted dismissal with prejudice of the Third and Fourth Claims.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether Baucom exhausted administrative remedies for Title VII race claim (relation-back and timeliness of third EEOC amendment)	Baucom contends the third amendment alleging race discrimination relates back to her original EEOC charge and is part of the same Title VII claim	Novant contends the third amendment raises a new theory (race) that did not arise from the EEOC investigation and was not timely filed	Court held the third amendment did not relate back to the original disability charge (and thus Baucom failed to exhaust); Title VII claim dismissed
Whether Baucom pleaded a viable § 1981 claim (but-for causation and factual specificity)	Baucom alleges Novant’s refusal to accommodate and termination were motivated by race, citing a later accommodation given to a white nurse	Novant argues Baucom failed to plead facts showing but-for causation or that the other nurse was similarly situated; allegations are conclusory	Court held Baucom failed to plead but-for causation or adequate factual allegations under Comcast/Iqbal/Twombly; § 1981 claim dismissed

Ashcroft v. Iqbal, 556 U.S. 662 (2009) (pleading must contain sufficient factual matter to state a plausible claim)
Bell Atl. Corp. v. Twombly, 550 U.S. 544 (2007) (plausibility standard for Rule 12(b)(6) complaints)
Chacko v. Patuxent Inst., 429 F.3d 505 (4th Cir. 2005) (exhaustion requirement promotes notice and conciliation; EEOC charge limits litigation scope)
Chisholm v. U.S. Postal Serv., 665 F.2d 482 (4th Cir. 1981) (scope of civil action confined by scope of administrative investigation reasonably expected to follow charge)
Bryant v. Bell Atl. Md., Inc., 288 F.3d 124 (4th Cir. 2002) (Title VII claim barred where administrative charge alleges one basis and litigation alleges another)
Sloop v. Mem’l Mission Hosp., Inc., 198 F.3d 147 (4th Cir. 1999) (administrative charge limits scope of Title VII claims)
Comcast Corp. v. Nat’l Ass’n of Afr.-Owned Media, 140 S. Ct. 1009 (2020) (§ 1981 requires pleading and proving but-for causation)
McDonnell Douglas Corp. v. Green, 411 U.S. 792 (1973) (burden-shifting framework for discrimination claims)
Nadendla v. WakeMed, 24 F.4th 299 (4th Cir. 2022) (application of pleading and § 1981 standards)
Denny v. Elizabeth Arden Salons, Inc., 456 F.3d 427 (4th Cir. 2006) (§ 1981 requires intent to discriminate and interference with contractual interest)