`
`
`
`IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
`FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLORADO
`
`
`
`Civil Action No.: _______________
`
`R2 Medical Clinic, P.C., a Colorado Corporation,
`
`Plaintiff,
`
`
`v.
`
`Daniel Lann, M.D., an Individual,
`Denver Stretch Institute, Inc. d/b/a Denver Sports Recovery, a Colorado Corporation,
`Katie McConnell, an Individual,
`David Raday, Jr., an Individual
`Optimization Clinics, LLC, a Colorado Limited Liability Corporation and
`
`Does 1 through 10,
`
`
`Defendants.
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`VERIFIED COMPLAINT
`PRELIMINARY AND PERMANENT INJUNCTIVE RELIEF
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`R2 Medical Clinic (
`
`
`
`), by and through its undersigned attorneys, hereby
`
`submits its Verified Complaint for Temporary Restraining Order
`
`Permanent Injunctive Relief Complaint
`
`against Defendants Daniel Lann, M.D.
`
`,
`
`Denver Stretch Institute, Inc. d/b/a Denver Sports Recovery
`
`, Katie McConnell
`
`(McConnell), David Raday, Jr.
`
`, Optimization Clinics, LLC,1 and Does 1through 10
`
`Defendant
`
`, and states as follows:
`
`
`
`
`
`
`1 Optimization Clinic, LLC, is a corporation owned and operated by Raday that conducted business with R2. Any
`reference to Raday shall also be a reference to Optimization Clinic, LLC.
`
`
`
`1
`
`
`
`Case 1:22-cv-01000-RM Document 1 Filed 04/25/22 USDC Colorado Page 2 of 20
`
`I.
`
`INTRODUCTION
`
`While working for R2, Raday and McConnell conspired with Lann, DSR, Optimization
`
`Clinics, LLC, and Does 1 -
`
`relationships and
`
`patient
`
`those patients, which R2 has spent
`
`significant resources developing, including investing in computer software systems to store
`
`confidential patient information that is not known to the public and paying compensation to Raday
`
`and McConnell for their work with R2. R2, through its contractual relationship with Raday and
`
`McConnell,
`
` scheduling patient appointments,
`
`s, including its HubSpot, a patient retention
`
`management system, and Simple Practice, an electronic medical records management facility,
`
`which together store patient medical information. These computer systems
`
`secret and confidential patient information including paperwork, lab results, medical charts and
`
`notes, patient medications, upcoming appointments, phone tracking consultations, record review,
`
`treatment plans, and patient email contacts.
`
`Raday and McConnell voluntarily terminated their contractual relationships with R2 and,
`
`afterwards, although they are not medical doctors and cannot provide medical treatment to patients
`
`without supervision from a medical doctor, each performed medical procedures on
`
`Erik Natkin, D.O.
`
`developed a relationship with Lann, DSR, Optimization Clinics, LLC, and Does 1 -
`
`patients, consistent with the treatment plan R2 developed for those patients
`
`,
`
`patients,
`
`computer systems. Raday and McConnell exceeded their authorized use when they accessed those
`
`
`
`2
`
`
`
`Case 1:22-cv-01000-RM Document 1 Filed 04/25/22 USDC Colorado Page 3 of 20
`
`R2 computer systems and have used and are using R2 patient information, in conjunction with
`
`Lann, Optimization Clinics, LLC, DSR and Does 1-
`
`.
`
`Raday and McConnell, each previously signed
`
`the leases for the buildings where R2 had its Arvada and Greeley clinics and after terminating their
`
`contractual relationship with R2, they demanded that R2 leave the clinics within three (3) days,
`
`despite R2 having paid rent for both clinic locations for well over one year.
`
`Raday and McConnell later retracted their demands that R2 leave within three (3) days and
`
`allowed R2 to remain in the clinics for the month of April because R2 had already paid rent.
`
`However, Raday and McConnell tried to pay the rent for the month of April so that a new provider
`
` in the same
`
`clinics. Raday subsequently allowed R2 access to the Arvada, Colorado clinic, but McConnell
`
`refuses --
`
` -- to provide R2 full access to the Greeley,
`
`Colorado clinic, in essence locking R2 out of the Greeley, Colorado clinic and prohibiting R2
`
`from physically accessing the medical equipment, controlled substances and its physical patient
`
`files contained in the clinic. Since the beginning of April, R2 was able to contact six (6) patients
`
`to schedule appointments in the Greeley clinic for medical visits and/or to pick up medication but
`
`had to cancel those appointments
`
`Those patients have not re-scheduled their appointments with R2 and presumably have established
`
`care with Defendants at their new clinic.
`
`appointments with R2, which was routinely done by Raday and McConnell as part of their work
`
`with R2. R2 has since made efforts to contact those patients in April 2022, who regularly scheduled
`
`monthly follow-up appoints with R2, the patients responded
`
`ies about setting their
`
`
`
`3
`
`
`
`Case 1:22-cv-01000-RM Document 1 Filed 04/25/22 USDC Colorado Page 4 of 20
`
`follow-up appoints with vague and noncommittal responses and some do not return R2 telephone
`
`calls about setting follow-up appointments. Other patients tell R2 that they are going with Raday
`
`and/or McConnell, despite neither of them being able to provide medical treatment without a
`
`medical doctor like Lann and DSR providing medical supervision for medical procedures they
`
`may perform.
`
`R2 brings claims against Defendants for violation of the Stored Communications Act, 18
`
`U.S.C. §§2701 et seq
`
` violation of the Defend Trade Secrets Act, 18 U.S.C. §1839
`
`D
`
`, violation of the Colorado Uniform Trade Secrets Act, C.R.S. §7-74-
`
`civil conspiracy to misappropriate trade secrets, and tortious interference with business expectancy.
`
`Jurisdiction and Venue
`
`1.
`
` This action arises under the Constitution and laws of the United States, including
`
`Article III, Section 1 of the United States Constitution and is brought pursuant to the Stored
`
`U.S.C.
`
`D
`
`. The Jurisdiction of this Court is invoked pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §§ 1331,
`
`§§2701 et seq. and the Defend Trade Secrets Act, 18
`
`1343, and 1337.
`
`2.
`
`Venue is proper in the United States District Court for the District of Colorado,
`
`pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1391 because the events giving rise to the instant claims occurred within
`
`this District and Defendants reside in this District.
`
`3.
`
`The Court has supplemental pendent jurisdiction for the Colorado Uniform Trade
`
`Secrets Act, C.R.S. §7-74-
`
`sappropriate trade secrets, and
`
`tortious interference with contract and business expectancy claims, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1367
`
`because the violations of federal laws alleged are substantial and pendent causes of action derived
`
`from a common nucleus of operative facts.
`
`
`
`4
`
`
`
`Case 1:22-cv-01000-RM Document 1 Filed 04/25/22 USDC Colorado Page 5 of 20
`
`The Parties
`
`4.
`
`R2 is a Colorado Professional Corporation organized in December 2020, with its
`
`principal place of business in Denver, Colorado and has additional clinics in Aurora, Greeley and
`
`Arvada. R2, through Dr. Erik Natkin, D.O., provides regeneration and rejuvenation treatments to
`
`optimize its patients health. Specifically, Plaintiff provides health optimization services including
`
`hormone therapies, nutrition and supplementation, among other anti-aging treatments.
`
`5.
`
`Lann is a licensed medical doctor affiliated with DSR and
`
`patients looking to stay in the game, optimize their health and stay active
`
`hormones, using a variety of means including bioidentical therapies, pellets, injections and/or
`
`2 Lann directly competes with Dr. Natkin and R2 for patients to whom they provide
`
`substantially similar medical care.
`
`6.
`
`Defendant Denver Stretch Institute, Inc. d/b/a/ Denver Sports Recovery
`
` is
`
`a Colorado corporation with its primary place of business in Denver, Colorado. DSR claims that
`
`restore function so that anyone can experience injury recovery and improved physical
`
`3 DSR employs Lann as one of its medical providers. DSR is a competitor of R2
`
`as to the type of services they provide for their patients.
`
`7.
`
`Greeley, Colorado, and was contracted by Plaintiff as a Medical Assistant/Patient Liaison from
`
`January 2021 to April 2022.
`
`
`2 See https://www.denversportsrecovery.com/providers/daniel-lann-md-facep (last accessed April 15, 2022).
`3 See https://www.denversportsrecovery.com/about (last accessed April 15, 2022).
`
`
`
`5
`
`
`
`Case 1:22-cv-01000-RM Document 1 Filed 04/25/22 USDC Colorado Page 6 of 20
`
`8.
`
`Colorado and was contracted by Plaintiff as a Medical Assistant/Patient Liaison from January 2021
`
`to April 2022.
`
`9.
`
`Defendant Optimization Clinic, LLC, is a Colorado Limited Liability Company
`
`formed in November 2020. Upon information and belief, Optimization Clinic, LLC is wholly
`
`owned and operated by David Raday, Jr.
`
`10.
`
`Does 1 through 10, upon information and belief, may be medical doctors or medical
`
`provides who serve as medical supervisors for Defendants Raday and McConnell, and that directly
`
`compete with R2 for patients for whom they provide substantially similar medical treatments.4
`
`II.
`
`GENERAL ALLEGATIONS
`
`A.
`
`R2 contracted with Raday and McConnell, gave them access to its patients
`and computer systems, which contained
`confidential and private patient
`information, not known to the public
`
`
`
`11.
`
`In August 2020, Raday approached Dr. Natkin and requested that he take over as
`
`-employing clinic, ReliveMD, which ceased to exist, and R2
`
`contracted with Raday in January 2021.
`
`12.
`
`R2 also contracted with McConnell in January 2021 and she also previously worked
`
`for ReliveMD.
`
`13.
`
`R2 paid Raday and McConnell for their work at R2 and to assist with recruiting and
`
`
`
`
`
`4
`medicine also includes a clinic located at 1279 S. Cherokee St., Denver, CO
`which appears to be a competitor to R2, providing hormone therapy to patients, among other services. See
`https://www.facebook.com/people/Integrated-Medical-Arts/100032453426768 (Last accessed April 20, 2022).
`
`
`
`6
`
`
`
`Case 1:22-cv-01000-RM Document 1 Filed 04/25/22 USDC Colorado Page 7 of 20
`
`14.
`
`Raday worked at
`
` clinics in Arvada, Aurora and occasionally Denver and
`
`McConnell worked at the Greeley and Arvada clinic locations. Both signed personally for the
`
`leases of the Arvada and Greeley clinics.
`
`15.
`
`Raday and McConnell became the
`
`primary contacts for
`
` patients, which included answering simple questions, scheduling
`
`appointments, performing lab draws and therapeutic phlebotomies and refilling and distributing
`
`medication (including controlled substances such as testosterone). Raday and McConnell called
`
`R2 patients, setting their next appointment
`
`computer systems to ensure
`
`accurate patient information was updated. R2 gave Raday and McConnell access to use two
`
`separate computer facilities which Plaintiff utilizes in its business: 1) HubSpot, a client retention
`
`management system used for marketing, tracking e-mail messages, tracking conversations
`
`between staff, assigning tasks to one another, and distribution of treatment plans that are emailed
`
`to the patient; and 2)
`
`medical information was stored including labs, charts, medical notes and information regarding
`
`medications and all patient demographic information including, but not limited to, address, phone
`
`numbers, email.
`
`16.
`
`R2 ensures the information contained in the two (2) computer systems remains
`
`confidential due to the value to the practice by not being known publicly and because the R2 patient
`
`medical information contained in those systems are protected health information.
`
`17.
`
`R2 utilizes the computer systems and the information contained therein in the
`
`practice of medicine for its patients, which includes prescribing testosterone and other controlled
`
`substances that are used in interstate or foreign commerce.
`
`
`
`7
`
`
`
`Case 1:22-cv-01000-RM Document 1 Filed 04/25/22 USDC Colorado Page 8 of 20
`
`18.
`
`R2 also uses an app through which Raday and McConnell were supposed to make
`
`phone number. Raday and McConnell were only authorized to make calls with their mobile phones
`
`using the app, not directly contacting patients.
`
`19.
`
`R2 had a regular procedure its employees followed when patients would come into
`
`the clinic for either appointments or to pick up medication. Prior to the patient departing the clinic,
`
`the medical assistant or other employee interacting with the patient (generally Raday and
`
`McConnell in the Arvada and Greeley clinics), would set a follow-up appointment for the patient
`
`for the next month. The follow-up appointments were to review lab results with Dr. Natkin, draw
`
`blood to conduct lab tests, pick up medication or to discuss their treatment plans.
`
`20.
`
`Throughout 2021, at the end of each
`
`full with patient appointments made the month prior by Raday, McConnell and other employees.
`
`21.
`
`Defendants Raday and McConnell utilized the two computer facilities, Hub Spot
`
`and Simple Practice, when setting up those
`
`Defendants Raday and McConnell Conspired to
`C.
`patients, misappropriate R2
`patients begin treating with Lann, DSR and Does 1 through 10.
`
`
`
`
`
`ood will with its
`
`22.
`
`In early March 2022, Dr. Natkin had a phone conversation with Defendant Raday
`
`and advised him that R2
`
` in
`
`clinics on a regular basis.
`
`wanted to be in the clinics.
`
`23.
`
`Throughout the month of March 2022,
`
`future patient
`
`appointments for the following month were not scheduled by Raday or McConnell as
`
`expectation of their jobs and as they regularly did previously. When Dr. Natkin reviewed the clinic
`
`
`
`8
`
`
`
`Case 1:22-cv-01000-RM Document 1 Filed 04/25/22 USDC Colorado Page 9 of 20
`
`calendars in the end of March, the calendars for both the Arvada and Greeley clinics had no future
`
`appointments scheduled for the month of April. Defendants Raday and McConnell were
`
`purposefully not scheduling follow-up appointments so that they could take Plaintif
`
`with them to their new provider, Lann, DSR, and/or Does 1 through 10.
`
`24.
`
`patient without any interaction with a Medical Provider and formal treatment plan for the patient.
`
`McConnell also performed multiple therapeutic phlebotomies without tany labs, patient intake
`
`forms, consent forms or provider-
`
`
`
`25.
`
`On March 29, 2022, Raday requested a meeting with Dr. Natkin which he set for
`
`April 1, 2022. Dr. Natkin was not aware of the purpose of the meeting and was surprised when
`
`both Raday and McConnell appeared at the meeting. Raday and McConnell advised Dr. Natkin
`
`of their resignation from R2 during that meeting.
`
`26.
`
`Raday advised Dr. Natkin that Raday was working with his father and a family
`
`friend on their own clinic. McConnell affirmed that she was going to work with Raday in that
`
`clinic.
`
`27.
`
`that he performed work for R2 was April 1, 2022, and
`
`
`
`28. When Dr. Natkin realized his patients did not have appropriate follow-up
`
`appointments scheduled, he and/or his staff contacted them to set up appointments that should have
`
`already been scheduled by Raday and McConnell
`
`
`
`9
`
`
`
`Case 1:22-cv-01000-RM Document 1 Filed 04/25/22 USDC Colorado Page 10 of 20
`
`staff were evasive or ambivalent
`
`about setting up future appointments.
`
`29.
`
`At least one other patient failed to show up for her appointment at R2
`
`when Dr. Natkin inquired, he discovered that Lann had prescribed the same medication for that
`
`patient that she had taken while a patient of R2, which was part of the confidential treatment plan
`
`created by R2, only days after the patient missed the R2 appointment.
`
`30.
`
`Defendants Raday and McConnell, as the main points of contact for patients, were
`
`aware of how to access and confiscate
`
` regimens, medical appointments,
`
`blood tests and treatment plans and upon information and belief, were able to easily use that
`
`Lann, DSR and/or Does 1 through 10.
`
`31.
`
`facilities when they obtained patient contact information, treatment plans, medication and
`
`appointment regimens to take with them to Lann and his clinic, DSR and/or Does 1 through 10.
`
`D.
`Raday and McConnell conspired to deny R2 full access to the Greeley clinic, where
`monthly.
`
`
`32. When Raday resigned, he told R2 to vacate the Arvada clinic over a weekend and
`
`to be out by Monday, April 4, 2022. Dr. Natkin advised this was impossible as he had to have
`
`time to locate another clinic facility and move all of the equipment.
`
`33. McConnell also told R2 to vacate the Greeley clinic over a weekend and be out by
`
`Monday, April 4, 2022. She eventually changed her mind and decided he could stay until the end
`
`of April, but she refused to provide Dr. Natkin with access to the Greeley clinic, insisting that she
`
`had to get permission from the landlord to provide Dr. Natkin with the
`
`
`
`10
`
`
`
`Case 1:22-cv-01000-RM Document 1 Filed 04/25/22 USDC Colorado Page 11 of 20
`
`and alarm access code to the building. McConnell still has not provided Dr. Natkin access to his
`
`clinic in Greeley, which contains testosterone, a controlled substance.
`
`34.
`
`R2 was able to contact six (6) patients to re-schedule their appointments in the
`
`Greeley clinic but had to cancel those appointments because R2 had no access to the Greeley clinic
`
`
`
`35. While McConnell has allowed R2 to remain in the Greeley clinic through the end
`
`of May, her refusal to provide Dr. Natkin the key and security system access code to the building
`
`is obstructing his ability to conduct patient appointments, medication pick-ups and to monitor the
`
`controlled substances kept at that location.
`
`36.
`
` making it seem like R2 simply closed its doors without
`
`notifying its patients. Even if patients show up to the Greeley Clinic, R2 cannot get into the clinic
`
`to treat them because McConnell has locked the clinic, and it essentially appears as if R2 is no
`
`longer operating its Greeley clinic. Defendants have and continue to interfere with
`
`
`
`relationship with Dr. Natkin, which took substantial time, effort and resources to cultivate.
`
`Defendants have also caus
`
` to either delay receiving treatment and/or
`
`medication from R2 or seek out similar services from another doctor such as Lann.
`
`37.
`
`she alone had f
`
` trade secrets, but was to use the information only for R2, not another clinic or for
`
`their own personal benefit.
`
`38.
`
`
`
`11
`
`.
`
`
`
`Case 1:22-cv-01000-RM Document 1 Filed 04/25/22 USDC Colorado Page 12 of 20
`
`E.
`
`
`39.
`
`Defendants have caused R2 irreparable harm to the good will R2 built with
`its patients
`relationships and expectancies with its patients.
`
`As a result of Defendant
`
`-up appointments for
`
`the month of April 2022, R2 has suffered and will continue to suffer significant irreparable harm.
`
`40.
`
`business model depended upon following patients closely through their course
`
`of treatment including frequent follow-up appointments with Medical Providers Dr. Natkin and
`
` to ensure their treatment is appropriate. In addition, most patients are
`
`scheduled for monthly medication pick-ups and labs to draw blood. Most patients had a monthly
`
`appointment at the clinic.
`
`41.
`
`Defendants schemed to take patients with them and locking R2 out of the Greeley clinic,
`
`Defendants ensured that
`
` business for the month of April would be nearly non-existent for the
`
`Greeley and Arvada clinics.
`
`42.
`
` Without having appropriate follow-up with their established provider, R2,
`
`Defendants ensured that
`
`patients would establish care with a new provider, Lann, DSR and/or
`
`Does 1 through 10, with whom Raday and McConnell are now associated.
`
`III. CLAIMS FOR RELIEF
`
`FIRST CLAIM FOR RELIEF
`
`Violation of the Stored Communications Act
`(Against Defendants Raday and McConnell)
`
`R2 incorporates the foregoing allegations as if fully set forth herein.
`
`R2 utilizes HubSpot as a facility through which electronic communication services
`
`43.
`
`44.
`
`are provided. HubSpot sends electronic mail to
`
`patients including pertinent health
`
`information such as treatment plans.
`
`
`
`12
`
`
`
`Case 1:22-cv-01000-RM Document 1 Filed 04/25/22 USDC Colorado Page 13 of 20
`
`45.
`
`Defendants Raday and McConnell were only authorized to use HubSpot and Simple
`
`Practice to follow R2
`
`set follow-up appointments for them.
`
`46.
`
`Defendants Raday and McConnell exceeded their authority to access
`
`computer facilities when they utilized the information contained therein to entice
`
`patients
`
`Does 1 through 10.
`
` new employer, Lann and DSR and/or
`
`47.
`
`Raday and McConnell violated 18 U.S.C. § 2701(a)(2) when they intentionally
`
`exceeded their authority to use
`
` computer facilities for purposes other than to schedule
`
`appointments with R2.
`
`48.
`
`R2 has suffered and continues to suffer damages in an amount to be proven at trial.
`
`SECOND CLAIM FOR RELIEF
`
`Violation of the Defend Trade Secrets Act, 18 U.S.C. §1839
`(Against all Defendants)
`
`R2 incorporates the foregoing allegations as if fully set forth herein.
`
`Defendants have violated the Defend Trade Secrets Act (18 U.S.C. §1839)
`
`
`
` medical
`
`49.
`
`50.
`
`D
`
`practice.
`
`51.
`
`The DTSA, 18 U.S.C. § 1839(3) defines a trade secret as:
`
`All forms and types of financial, business, scientific, technical, economic,
`or engineering information, including patterns, plans, compilations,
`program devices, formulas, designs, prototypes, methods, techniques,
`processes, procedures, programs, or codes, whether tangible or intangible,
`and whether or how stored, compiled, or memorialized physically,
`electronically, graphically, photographically, or in writing if
`
`
`
`
`
`13
`
`
`
`Case 1:22-cv-01000-RM Document 1 Filed 04/25/22 USDC Colorado Page 14 of 20
`
`(A)
`The owner thereof has taken reasonable measures to keep such
`information secret and
`
`The information derives independent economic value, actual or potential,
`from not being generally known to, and not being readily ascertainable
`through proper means by another person who can obtain economic value
`from the disclosure or use of the information
`
`The information contained in the HubSpot and Simple Practice systems qualifies
`
`52.
`
`as a trade secret because it includes business information in the form of patient details, treatment
`
`plans, and medical notes that derive their own economic value as they are not generally known or
`
`ascertainable by another person not authorized by R2 to access the information.
`
`53.
`
`The treatment plans contained in R2
`
`assessment of patient medical needs and individualizes the services R2 offers. Those plans
`
`included specific medication recommendations, frequency of follow-up, periodic blood draws and
`
`other recommended procedures that all have their own economic value.
`
`54.
`
`R2 has taken measures to ensure the confidentiality of the information in the
`
`HubSpot and Simple Practice systems by limiting access to the systems to individuals who work
`
`for Plaintiff and by only allowing those authorized users to utilize the information to set future
`
`
`
`55.
`
` information, including but not limited to, treatment plans, prescriptions, lab reports and
`
`contact information to solicit patients to establish care with Lann, DSR and/or Does 1 through 10.
`
`56.
`
`As a direct and proximate
`
`DTSA, Plaintiff
`
`has suffered and will continue to suffer damages in an amount to be proven at trial.
`
`
`
`
`
`14
`
`
`
`
`
`Case 1:22-cv-01000-RM Document 1 Filed 04/25/22 USDC Colorado Page 15 of 20
`
`THIRD CLAIM FOR RELIEF
`
`Violation of the Colorado Uniform Trade Secrets Act, C.R.S. §7-74-
`(Against all Defendants)
`
`Plaintiff incorporates the foregoing allegations as if fully set forth herein.
`
`Colorado defines a trade secret as,
`
`57.
`
`58.
`
`The whole or any portion or phase of a scientific or technical information, design,
`process, procedure, formula, improvement, confidential business or financial
`information, listing of names, addresses, or telephone numbers, or other
`information relating to any business or profession which is secret and of value.
`
`secret from becoming available to persons other than those selected by the owner
`to have access thereto for limited purposes.5
`
`The two systems R2 utilizes clearly both contain trade secrets as they not only
`
`59.
`
`contain basic contact information of
`
`s patients, but also treatment plans, progress notes and
`
`other medical data specific to
`
`patients. R2 keeps those trade secrets confidential as R2 limits
`
`those individuals who have access to the systems and limits the reasons for which they can access
`
`the information contained in those systems.
`
`60.
`
`Defendants Raday and McConnell misappropriated
`
`trade secrets when they
`
`took information in the two systems and utilized them to contact
`
`patients in an effort to
`
`transfer their care to Defendant Lann, DSR and/or Does 1 through 10..
`
`61.
`
`Lann and DSR are using
`
`trade secrets to poach
`
`patients without the
`
`express or implied consent of R2 and Defendants knew that Raday and McConnell improperly
`
`obtained R2
`
`
`
`62.
`
`As a direct and proximate
`
`R2 has suffered and
`
`continues to suffer damages in an amount to be proven at trial.
`
`
`5 C.R.S. §7-74-102(4) (emphasis added).
`
`
`
`
`
`15
`
`
`
`Case 1:22-cv-01000-RM Document 1 Filed 04/25/22 USDC Colorado Page 16 of 20
`
`FOURTH CLAIM FOR RELIEF
`
`Civil Conspiracy to Misappropriate Trade Secrets
`(Against all Defendants)
`
`R2 incorporates the foregoing allegations as if fully set forth herein.
`
`
`
`63.
`
`64.
`
`of the minds; 3) on an object to be accomplished or a course of action to be followed; 4) one or
`
`more overt unlawful acts are performed; and
`
`6
`
`65.
`
`Here, Raday and McConnell, acted in concert by not scheduling
`
`patients for
`
`follow-up appointments for the month of April 2022 and beyond, and instead used the information
`
` patients, including but not limited to contact information, treatment plans, medications to
`
` new employer, Lann, DSR and/or Does 1 through 10.
`
`66.
`
`Defendants also acted in concert to decide to lock R2 out of the Greeley clinic so
`
`R2 could not treat its Greeley, Colorado patients in that clinic; making it necessary for patients to
`
`seek treatment from another provider
`
`and Raday made sure that any R2 patients began seeing the new provider, Lann
`
`67.
`
`and continues to suffer damages in an amount to be proven at trial.
`
`FIFTH CLAIM FOR RELIEF
`
`Tortious Interference with Contract and Business Expectancy
`(Against all Defendants)
`
`Plaintiff incorporates the foregoing allegations as if fully set forth herein.
`
`68.
`
`
`6 Ziegler v. Inabata of Am., Inc. 316 F. Supp. 2d 908, 918. (D. Colo. 2004).
`
`
`
`16
`
`
`
`Case 1:22-cv-01000-RM Document 1 Filed 04/25/22 USDC Colorado Page 17 of 20
`
`69.
`
`them to their new employer, Plaintiff
`
`eeley and Denver clinics had 30% growth.
`
`70.
`
`-patient relationship with
`
`monitor progress, distribute medication, and provide additional follow-up as needed to attain
`
`treatment goals.
`
`71.
`
`failing to follow protocol in setting up future appointments for the month of April and beyond and
`
`locking R2 out of the Greeley Colorado clinic.
`
`72.
`
`-long treatment
`
`regimens wherein they were closely monitored by Dr. Natkin.
`
`73.
`
`revenue and non-
`
`74.
`
`
`
`will continue to suffer damages due to interference with business expectancy.
`
`SIXTH CLAIM FOR RELIEF
`
`Accounting and Constructive Trust
`(Against all Defendants)
`
`Plaintiff incorporates the foregoing allegations as if fully set forth herein.
`
`As employees of R2, Raday and McConnell
`
`75.
`
`76.
`
`systems, HubSpot and Simple Practice only in the course of completing their duties
`
`
`
`
`
`17
`
`
`
`Case 1:22-cv-01000-RM Document 1 Filed 04/25/22 USDC Colorado Page 18 of 20
`
`77.
`
`order to
`
`through 10.
`
`78.
`
`As a result of abusing their employment relationship with R2 by stealing its
`
`proprietary patient contact and treatment details, the revenue they and all
`
`Defendants acq
`
`79.
`
`
`
`through
`
`10, R2 has suffered damages in an amount to be proven at trial.
`
`
`
`PRAYER FOR RELIEF
`
`WHEREFORE, Plaintiff R2 Medical Clinic, P.C. respectfully requests that the Court
`
`enter judgment in its favor and against Defendants Raday, McConnell, Lann, DSR, Optimization
`
`Clinics, LLC, and Does 1 through 10 on Plaintiff s claims as follows:
`
`A.
`
`Grant a Temporary Restraining Order, Preliminary and Permanent Injunction
`
`against: Defendants David Raday, Jr., Katie McConnell, Daniel S. Lann, Denver
`
`Sports Recovery, Optimization Clinics, LLC and Does 1 through 10, as follows:
`
`1. Require Defendants to immediately provide R2 access to the Greeley
`
`Colorado clinic;
`
`2. Require Defendants to
`
`information, including but not limited to patient contact information,
`
`medical reports, treatment plans, lab tests and any other information they
`
`
`
`18
`
`
`
`Case 1:22-cv-01000-RM Document 1 Filed 04/25/22 USDC Colorado Page 19 of 20
`
`format.
`
`3.
`
`contact and/or treat any R2 patient;
`
`4. Require Defendants to provide a list of all R2 patients they contacted since
`
`March 15, 2022 to the date of the Temporary Restraining Order;
`
`5. Require Defendants to account for all income they received and/or billed to
`
`R2 patients who were treated since April 1, 2022, to the date of the
`
`Temporary Restraining Order and hold that money in a constructive trust
`
`bank account until this matter can be heard by the Court.
`
`B.
`
`Awarding Plaintiffs damages to the full extent proved to compensate for Plaintiff
`
`
`
`losses and continued losses resulting from Defendant misappropriation of
`
`;
`
`C.
`
`Awarding Plaintiff exemplary damages for Defendant
`
`fraudulent acts in willful
`
`determined at trial;
`
`D.
`
`Awarding Plaintiff its
`
`in violation C.R.S. § 7-74-104, to be
`
`18 U.S.C. §
`
`1836(b)(3)(D) and 18 U.S.C. §2707(b)(3) and any general and compensatory
`
`damages as proved; and
`
`E.
`
`Such other and further relief as the Court deems just and proper.
`
`VERIFICATION
`
`I, Dr. Erik Natkin, Owner of R2 Medical Clinic, Inc., swear and affirm under penalty
`of perjury under the laws of the State of Colorado that I have read the foregoing
`VERIFIED COMPLAINT and know the contents thereof to be true, except as to the
`
`
`
`19
`
`
`
`Case 1:22-cv-01000-RM Document 1 Filed 04/25/22 USDC Colorado Page 20 of 20
`
`matters therein state to be alleged upon information and belief, and as to those matters
`I believe them to be true.
`
`________________________________
`Dr. Erik Natkin, D.O.
`Owner, R2 Medical Clinic, P.C.
`
`04/25/22
`Dated: ________________
`
`25th
`Dated this ___ day of April, 2022.
`
`CAMPBELL LITIGATION, P.C.
`
`By: /s/Stacey A. Campbell
`Stacey A. Campbell
`Shana D. Velez
`1410 N. High Street
`Denver, Colorado 80218
`Tel: (303) 536-1833
`Email: stacey@campbell-litigation.com
` shana@campbell-litigation.com
` ATTORNEYS FOR PLAINTIFF
`
`20
`
`