McCoy v. State of Wyoming, 683 F. App'x 662

McCoy, an African-American former WDOC corrections officer, alleged he was wrongfully disciplined, then denied reinstatement in 2012, and that WDOC relied on false statements to bar his re-employment; he filed Title VII and § 1983 claims in July 2015.
Despite court guidance and multiple extensions, McCoy served only the State of Wyoming and WDOC; three individual defendants (A&I, Lampert, Reedy) were dismissed without prejudice for lack of service.
The district court dismissed McCoy’s Title VII claims under Rule 12(b)(6) for failing to plead plausible discrimination or a connection to his EEOC charge, and dismissed § 1983 claims with prejudice as barred by Eleventh Amendment immunity; McCoy was given a limited time to amend.
The court granted a short extension of the amendment deadline (to Sept. 2); McCoy missed the deadline, submitted an amended complaint the day his case was closed, and then sought reconsideration claiming nonreceipt of the extension order.
The district court denied reconsideration, found McCoy’s non-receipt claim not credible, and dismissed the Title VII claims with prejudice for failure to prosecute and to follow court orders; the Tenth Circuit affirmed.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Sufficiency of Title VII pleading	McCoy contended his complaint alleged disparate treatment and that false statements blocked re-employment	Complaint lacked factual allegations identifying false statements or similarly situated comparators	Dismissal affirmed: allegations were conclusory and not plausibly discriminatory
Extension of time to amend	McCoy argued his continuing health problems justified a 30-day extension beyond Aug 15	Court limited extension to 18 days given prior extensions, case age, and lack of explanation	No abuse of discretion in granting only an 18-day extension
Dismissal with prejudice and case closure	McCoy sought reversal and remand; claimed amended complaint should proceed	Court pointed to repeated delays, failure to serve defendants, multiple reconsideration motions, and warnings about deadlines	Affirmed: dismissal with prejudice for failure to prosecute and follow orders was not an abuse of discretion
Denial of reconsideration	McCoy claimed he did not receive the mailed order extending deadline to Sept 2	Court established order was mailed to correct address, McCoy had ample time and made no timely inquiries	Denial affirmed: no abuse of discretion and non-receipt claim lacked credibility

Mocek v. City of Albuquerque, 813 F.3d 912 (10th Cir. 2015) (pleading reviewed for plausibility under Rule 12(b)(6))
Ashcroft v. Iqbal, 556 U.S. 662 (2009) (conclusory allegations insufficient to plead plausibly)
Ledbetter v. City of Topeka, 318 F.3d 1183 (10th Cir. 2003) (pro se pleadings construed liberally)
Garrett v. Selby Connor Maddux & Janer, 425 F.3d 836 (10th Cir. 2005) (appellants must articulate reasons for reversal; issues may be waived)
Hwang v. Kan. State Univ., 753 F.3d 1159 (10th Cir. 2014) (plaintiff must allege facts showing comparators were similarly situated)
Rachel v. Troutt, 820 F.3d 390 (10th Cir. 2016) (Rule 6(b) extension reviewed for abuse of discretion)
Ecclesiastes 9:10-11-12, Inc. v. LMC Holding Co., 497 F.3d 1135 (10th Cir. 2007) (abuse of discretion standard explained)
Rogers v. Andrus Transp. Servs., 502 F.3d 1147 (10th Cir. 2007) (dismissal for failure to prosecute reviewed for abuse of discretion)
Gripe v. City of Enid, 312 F.3d 1184 (10th Cir. 2002) (same)
Olsen v. Mapes, 333 F.3d 1199 (10th Cir. 2003) (Rule 41(b) authorizes sua sponte dismissal for failure to prosecute)
Lee v. Max Int'l, LLC, 638 F.3d 1318 (10th Cir. 2011) (dismissal with prejudice appropriate where party disobeys court orders)
Butler v. Kempthorne, 532 F.3d 1108 (10th Cir. 2008) (reconsideration reviewed for abuse of discretion)