Pendergraft v. DeJoy et al

1
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF OKLAHOMA
MARK A. PENDERGRAFT,
Plaintiff,
v.
DAVID STEINER, Postmaster General,
et al.,
Defendants.
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
Case No. CIV-24-1000-D
ORDER
Before the Court is Plaintiff’s Motion to Stay Proceedings Pending Resolution of
His Opposition to Government’s Notice of Substitution Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2679(d)(1)
[Doc. No. 48].
Plaintiff brought this action against the Postmaster General and two individual
employees of the United States Postal Service, Derren Giles-Bey and Summer Hyde-
Swaim, in their individual and official capacities [Doc. No. 15, Amended Complaint].
On August 6, 2025, the United States filed a Notice Pursuant to 28 U.S.C.
§ 2679(d)(1) [Doc. No. 41], certifying that Defendants Giles-Bey and Hyde-Swaim were
at all times acting within the scope of their employment with USPS, and thus the United
States should be substituted as the proper party defendant with respect to Count 7 of
Plaintiff’s Amended Complaint. See 28 U.S.C. § 2679(d)(1) (“Upon certification by the
Attorney General that the defendant employee was acting within the scope of his office or
employment at the time of the incident out of which the claim arose, any civil action or
proceeding commenced upon such claim … shall be deemed an action against the United
Case 5:24-cv-01000-D Document 49 Filed 09/02/25 Page 1 of 2

2
States …, and the United States shall be substituted as the party defendant.”). On the same
day, Defendants Giles-Bey and Hyde-Swaim filed Motions to Dismiss [Doc. Nos. 43, 44].
Plaintiff has filed responses in opposition to the United States’ notice and the
motions to dismiss [Doc. Nos. 45, 47]. Although Plaintiff requests a “stay of proceedings”
in the present motion, Plaintiff is actually requesting that the Court consider his opposition
to the United States’ notice in conjunction with Plaintiff’s opposition to the individual
defendants’ motions to dismiss, and the Court will do so. Accordingly, Plaintiff’s “Motion
to Stay Proceedings Pending Resolution of His Opposition to Government’s Notice of
Substitution Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2679(d)(1)” [Doc. No. 48] is DENIED as MOOT.
IT IS SO ORDERED this 2 nd day of September, 2025.
. DeGIUSTI
Chief United States District Judge
Case 5:24-cv-01000-D Document 49 Filed 09/02/25 Page 2 of 2