Dumas v. Proctor & Gamble Manufacturing Co.
Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit
1Opinion of the Court
ORDER AND JUDGMENT *
CARLOS F. LUCERO, Circuit Judge.
Richard Dumas, proceeding pro se, appeals the dismissal of his workplace discrimination suit against Proctor and Gamble (“P&G”). Because the district court properly found that Dumas failed to timely exhaust his administrative remedies, we exercise our jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291 and affirm.
I
Dumas was employed as a contractor by LaCosta, Inc. (“LaCosta”) and assigned to work at P&G’s Kansas City manufacturing plant starting in 2005. Between 2005 and 2007, Dumas alleges that he was subjected to discrimination in the workplace,…
2Cases cited8 opinions
- Hall v. BellmonCourt of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · 1991
- Montoya v. ChaoCourt of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · 2002
- Beaird v. Seagate Technology, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · 1998
- Turner v. Public Service Co. of ColoradoCourt of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · 2009
- Martinez v. OrrCourt of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · 1984
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by6 opinions
- Andria Borsody v. Frontier Heritage CommunitiesDistrict Court, D. Kansas · 2025
- Baker v. Key Maintenance, Inc.District Court, N.D. Oklahoma · 2019
- Bhatti v. SSM Health Care of Oklahoma IncDistrict Court, W.D. Oklahoma · 2020
- Kyomi Baker v. Transam Trucking, Inc.District Court, D. Kansas · 2026
- Lawrence v. Bonaventure of Castle RockDistrict Court, D. Colorado · 2022
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.