throbber
Case: 2:22-cv-01418-MHW-KAJ Doc #: 1-1 Filed: 03/08/22 Page: 1 of 17 PAGEID #: 5
`Case: 2:22-cv-01418-MHW-KAJ Doc #: 1-1 Filed: 03/08/22 Page: 1 of 17 PAGEID #: 5
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`EXHIBIT A
`EXHIBIT A
`
`
`
`

`

`Case: 2:22-cv-01418-MHW-KAJ Doc#: 1-1 Filed: 03/08/22 Page: 2 of 17 PAGEID #: 6
`Case: 2:22-cv-01418-MHW-KAJ Doc #: 1-1 Filed: 03/08/22 Page: 2 of 17 PAGEID #: 6
`
`IN THE COURT OF COMMONPLEAS OF DELAWARE COUNTY, OHIO
`
`SABINAR.KOEHLER
`
`Powell, Ohio 43065
`Plaintiff,
`
`vs.
`
`THE ANTHEM COMPANIES,INC.
`8940 LyraDrive, Suite 300
`Columbus, Ohio 43240
`and
`c/o CT Corp. System - Registered Agent
`4400 Easton Commons Way,Suite 125
`Columbus, Ohio 43219
`
`99-(WH-020053
`
`CASE NO.
`David M. Gormley
`JUDGEee
`
`JURY DEMAND ENDORSED
`HEREON
`
`Defendant.
`
`
`COMPLAINT
`
`
`Now comesPlaintiff, Sabina R. Koehler, who hereby alleges and asserts against Defendant,
`
`The Anthem Companies,Inc., as follows:
`
`L
`
`PARTIES
`
`1.
`
`Plaintiff, Sabina R. Koehler (“Koehler”), is an individual residing at 444 Heather
`
`Lane, Powell, Ohio 43065.
`
`2.
`
`Defendant, The Anthem Companies, Inc. (“Anthem”),
`
`is an Indiana for-profit
`
`corporation doing business in the State of Ohio, with its principal place ofbusinesslocated at 8940
`
`Lyra Drive, Suite 300, Columbus, Ohio 43230.
`
`II.
`
`JURISDICTION AND VENUE
`
`3.
`
`This Court has jurisdiction over this matter as the relevant agreements entered into
`
`by the parties herein and the events relevant to this action occurred in Delaware County, Ohio.
`
`CLERK OF COURTS - DELAWARE COUNTY, OH - COMMON PLEAS COURT
`22 CV H 02 0053 - GORMLEY, DAVID M
`FILED: 02/06/2022 02:42 PM
`
`

`

`Case: 2:22-cv-01418-MHW-KAJ Doc #: 1-1 Filed: 03/08/22 Page: 3 of 17 PAGEID #: 7
`Case: 2:22-cv-01418-MHW-KAJ Doc #: 1-1 Filed: 03/08/22 Page: 3 of 17 PAGEID #: 7
`
`4.
`
`For the reason described above, venueis proper in Delaware County, Ohio pursuant
`
`to Rule 3 of the Ohio Rules of Civil Procedure.
`
`I.
`
`FACTS COMMON TO ALL CLAIMS
`
`5.
`
`Plaintiff realleges and incorporates all
`
`the allegations contained in above
`
`paragraphsas if fully rewritten herein.
`
`6.
`
`7.
`
`8.
`
`2008.
`
`Koehleris a former employee of Anthem.
`
`Koehlerfirst started working at Anthem as a Customer Service Representative in
`
`Over the next 12 years, Koehler would distinguish herself at Anthem through her
`
`hard work and dedication with the hopes of making a career at Anthem until she was ready to
`
`retire.
`
`Koehler’s employment record at Anthem was unblemished, and she was being
`9.
`groomed for advancement.
`
`10.
`
`Koehler received glowing reviews from herdirect supervisors and/or managers and
`
`was regularly promoted into managerial positions.
`
`11.
`
`In 2017, Koehler received a promotion to serve as a Customer Service Manager
`
`Level 2 managing over 400 vendorrepresentatives and agents covering three different lines of
`business.
`|
`
`12.
`
`In Juneor July 2020, Koehler received what she believed to be an internal Anthem
`
`survey inquiring about an Anthem software platform and/or application called Sailpoint.
`
`13.
`
`Sailpoint allows managers to review each representative or agent under their
`
`supervision and ensure each one has the appropriate security access to applications necessary for
`
`them to do their job.
`
`

`

`Case: 2:22-cv-01418-MHW-KAJ Doc #: 1-1 Filed: 03/08/22 Page: 4 of 17 PAGEID #: 8
`Case: 2:22-cv-01418-MHW-KAJ Doc #: 1-1 Filed: 03/08/22 Page: 4 of 17 PAGEID #: 8
`
`14.
`
`Sailpoint is intended to ensure Anthem protects its customer’s protected health
`
`information (“PHI”), personally identifiable information (“PII”), Non-public information (“NPI”),
`
`and data privacy in compliance with state and federal laws,rules, and regulations.
`
`15.|Managers are required to review Sailpoint quarterly and validate that each
`representative or agent has the appropriate clearance for the security access applications assigned
`
`to them.
`
`16.
`
`The survey instructed Koehler to provide an accurate assessment and evaluation of
`
`Anthem’soperations andthe use ofthe Sailpoint in orderto identify issues and improve operations.
`
`17.
`
`Koehler responded to the survey by providing a detailed and accurate assessment
`
`of the Sailpoint application and identifying several problem areas with its use.
`
`18.
`
`Specifically, Koehler pointed out that the validation process was flawed becauseit
`
`was impossible for Anthem managers like herself, managing a large number of vendor
`
`representatives and agents over multiple lines of business, to review each representative or agent
`
`under
`
`their
`
`supervision
`
`regarding
`
`security
`
`access
`
`due
`
`to
`
`the
`
`sheer
`
`number of
`
`representatives/agents,
`
`lines of business, and applications that required regular review and
`
`certification.
`
`19.
`
`Koehler also indicated that Anthem failed to provide any training on the Sailpoint
`
`application or the validation process.
`
`20.
`
`Asa result of issues with the SailPoint system and the lack of training, Koehler
`
`indicated that Anthem maybefailing to adequately protect consumerdata, PHI, PII, and NPI, and
`
`maybein violation of relevant state and federal laws.
`
`

`

`Case: 2:22-cv-01418-MHW-KAJ Doc#: 1-1 Filed: 03/08/22 Page: 5 of 17 PAGEID #: 9
`Case: 2:22-cv-01418-MHW-KAJ Doc #: 1-1 Filed: 03/08/22 Page: 5 of 17 PAGEID #: 9
`
`21.
`
`Koehlerfelt obligated to honestly and accurately respondto the survey and provide
`
`as much information as possible to improve the Sailpoint application and Anthem operations for
`
`several reasons:
`
`a.
`
`to comply with the survey’s instructions;
`
`b.
`
`to be true to her nature to act with honesty, integrity, and actively improve the
`
`company she had dedicated herself to for the past 12-years; and
`
`c.
`
`to meet the expectations of Anthem’s culture change and leadershipinitiatives, in
`
`which Anthem’s leadership repeatedly emphasized to its employees, via video
`
`recordings, manager meetings, training sessions, and townhall meetings, the need
`
`to actively and honestly speak up to help identify and solve problemsin order to
`
`improve Anthem.
`
`22.
`
`In August 2020, Koehler learned that the Sailpoint survey had not been an internal
`
`Anthem survey, but was part of an independent external compliance audit.
`23.|Apparently, Koehler’s honest and truthful appraisal ofSailpoint and its validation
`
`process unwittingly exposed gaps in Anthem’s training, operations, and compliance programs, and
`
`resulted in a negative audit finding against Anthem.
`24.
`Soon thereafter, Koehler
`spoke at
`
`length with an Anthem representative
`
`investigating the Sailpoint issues raised by Koehler’s survey response.
`25.|The Anthem representative agreed that Koehler did nothing wrong by answering
`
`the survey truthfully and honestly, that senior leadership did not fully understand the issue, that
`
`the survey was deceptive asto its purpose and pointof origin, and that he understoodherintention
`
`was merely to respond honestly to improvethe validation process.
`
`

`

`Case: 2:22-cv-01418-MHW-KAJ Doc #: 1-1 Filed: 03/08/22 Page: 6 of 17 PAGEID #: 10
`Case: 2:22-cv-01418-MHW-KAJ Doc #: 1-1 Filed: 03/08/22 Page: 6 of 17 PAGEID #: 10
`
`26.
`
`On October 13, 2020, two Anthem representatives met with Koehler to discuss the
`
`“fallout from the audit.”
`27.
`It was at this point that Koehler was told she was being terminated by Anthem
`
`without any corrective action and despite the fact that Koehler had been an exemplary employee
`
`over her 12-year career with Anthem.
`
`28.
`
` Koehler’s employeefile with Anthem was updated to indicate she was terminated
`
`for just cause and wasineligible to bere-hired.
`
`29.
`
` Anthem’s purported reason for Koehler’s termination was that she submitted
`
`falsified records whenusingthe Sailpoint application regarding her review ofrepresentative and/or
`
`agent accessto sensitive data.
`
`30.|Anthem’s purported reasons for Koehler’s termination are pretextual.
`
`31.|Koehler wasactually terminated in retaliation for her survey response regarding her
`
`concerns regarding the Sailpoint application, which resulted in a negative audit finding for
`
`Anthem.
`
`32.
`
`The above facts demonstrate that Anthem engaged in a pattern and practice of
`
`unlawfulretaliation in violation of Ohio law and publicpolicy.
`
`33.
`
`There was a causal connection between Koehler’s survey response about Sailpoint
`
`and Anthem’s termination of Koehler.
`
`34.
`
`As a result of being wrongfullyterminated by Anthem, Koehler has suffered
`
`damages, including severe emotional distress, anxiety, and depression.
`
`

`

`Case: 2:22-cv-01418-MHW-KAJ Doc #: 1-1 Filed: 03/08/22 Page: 7 of 17 PAGEID #: 11
`Case: 2:22-cv-01418-MHW-KAJ Doc #: 1-1 Filed: 03/08/22 Page: 7 of 17 PAGEID #: 11
`
`IV.
`
`LEGAL CLAIMS
`
`COUNT ONE
`Wrongful Termination in Violation of Public Policy
`
`35.
`
`Plaintiff realleges and incorporates all
`
`the allegations contained in above
`
`paragraphsas if fully rewritten herein.
`
`36.|Aclear and well-established public policy exists to protect consumers’ private data,
`
`information, PHI, PII, and NPI as manifest in numerous state and federal laws, regulations, and
`
`rules, including, but not limited to, The Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act, The Dodd-Frank Wall Street
`
`Reform and ConsumerProtection Act, The Health Information Portability and Accountability Act,
`
`Federal Trade Commission Act, Children’s Online Privacy Protection Act, The Fair Credit
`Reporting Act as amended by The Fair and Accurate Credit Transactions Act, The Payment Card
`
`Industry Data Security Standard, the Telephone ConsumerProtection Act.
`
`37.
`
` Aclear and well-established public policy exists to protect consumers’ private data,
`
`information, PHI; PIJ, and NPI as manifest in the umbrella of privacy protections afforded under
`
`the Ohio Constitution and the United States Constitution.
`
`38.|Aclear and well-established public policy exists that professionals should provide
`
`truthful and accurate responses to independent auditors regarding a corporation’s policies,
`
`practices, operations, and regulations concerning the protection of consumers’ private data,
`information, PHI, PII, and NPI understate and federal laws, regulations, andrules.
`|
`
`39.|Aclear and well-established public policy exists and is manifested in Ohiostatutes
`
`and/or administrative regulations, or in the common law,against terminating and/orretaliating
`
`against an employee because she engagedin protected activity under Ohio law.
`
`40.
`
`Aclear and well-established public policy exists and is manifested in Ohio statutes
`
`and/or administrative regulations, or in the commonlaw,against terminating an employee based
`
`

`

`Case: 2:22-cv-01418-MHW-KAJ Doc #: 1-1 Filed: 03/08/22 Page: 8 of 17 PAGEID #: 12
`Case: 2:22-cv-01418-MHW-KAJ Doc #: 1-1 Filed: 03/08/22 Page: 8 of 17 PAGEID #: 12
`
`upon her responsesto independentauditors regarding a corporationspolicies, practices, operations,
`
`and regulations.
`
`41.|Anthem’s retaliation against Koehler jeopardizes said public policies.
`
`42.
`
` Anthem’s termination ofKoehler was motivated by conducted related to said public
`
`policies.
`
`43.|Anthem had no overriding business justification for terminating Koehler.
`
`44.
`45.
`
`Anthem hadno overriding businessjustification for retaliating against Koehler.
`Asa direct and proximate result of Anthem’s conduct, Koehler has suffered and
`
`will continue to suffer damages,
`
`including economic damages in an amount
`
`in excess of
`
`$25,000.00 to be determinedat trial and emotional distress damages.
`
`COUNT TWO
`Promissory Estoppel
`
`46.
`
`Plaintiff realleges and incorporates all
`
`the allegations contained in above
`
`paragraphsasif fully rewritten herein.
`
`47.
`Anthem made numerousrepresentations to Koehler and its employees that Anthem
`was undergoing a culture change and wanted its employeesto openly and honestly point out issues
`
`and problemsin order to improveits operations.
`
`48.
`
`Koehler reasonably relied upon Anthem’s representations and was induced thereby
`
`to provide a detailed, accurate, and honest appraisal of the Sailpoint application and its issues in
`responseto the audit survey to Koehler’s detriment.
`|
`
`49.
`
`As a direct and proximate result of Anthem’s conduct, Koehler has suffered and
`
`will continue to suffer damages,
`
`including economic damages in an amount
`
`in excess of
`
`$25,000.00 to be determinedattrial and emotional distress damages.
`
`

`

`Case: 2:22-cv-01418-MHW-KAJ Doc #: 1-1 Filed: 03/08/22 Page: 9 of 17 PAGEID #: 13
`Case: 2:22-cv-01418-MHW-KAJ Doc #: 1-1 Filed: 03/08/22 Page: 9 of 17 PAGEID #: 13
`
`V.
`
`REQUEST FOR RELIEF
`
`WHEREFORE, Plaintiff hereby demands judgment against Defendant and requests the
`
`following relief and damages:
`
`(a) Issue an order requiring Defendant to expunge her personnel file of all negative
`
`documentation andthat sheis eligible for re-hire;
`
`(b) Compensatory, monetary, special, and consequential damages in an amount in excess
`
`of $25,000.00 to be determinedattrial;
`
`(c) An award of punitive damages in an amountin excess of $25,000.00 to be determined
`
`at trial;
`
`(d) Plaintiff's cost, expenses,and reasonable attorney fees incurredin thislitigation; and
`
`(e) Any other legal and/or equitable relief deemed appropriate by this Court.
`
`Respectfully submitted,
`
`/s/ Craig J. Spadafore
`Craig J. Spadafore (0081279)
`Spadafore Law, LLC
`6545 McVey Blvd
`Columbus, Ohio 43235
`Phone: 614-441-1255
`Email: craig@spadaforelaw.com
`Counselfor Plaintiff
`
`JURY DEMAND
`
`Plaintiff hereby requests a jury of eight (8) on all triable issues offact.
`
`/s/ Craig J. Spadafore
`Craig J. Spadafore (0081279)
`
`

`

`Case: 2:22-cv-01418-MHW-KAJ Doc #: 1-1 Filed: 03/08/22 Page: 10 of 17 PAGEID #: 14
`Case: 2:22-cv-01418-MHW-KAJ Doc #: 1-1 Filed: 03/08/22 Page: 10 of 17 PAGEID #: 14
`
`IN THE COURT OF COMMONPLEAS OF DELAWARE COUNTY, OHIO
`
`CLASSIFICATION FORM
`
`CASE NO.
`
`PLEASE INDICATE CLASSIFICATION INTO WHICH THIS CASE FALLS:
`
`CIVIL
`
`DOMESTIC RELATIONS
`
`(
`
`(
`
`(
`
`(
`
`(
`
`(
`
`)
`
`Professional Tort ------------ A
`
`) Product Liability ------------
`
`B
`
`) Other Torts ------------------- C
`
`) Workers Compensation ---- D
`
`) Foreclosure ------------------
`
`) Administrative Appeal-----
`
`E
`
`F
`
`(
`
`(
`
`(
`
`(
`
`(
`
`(
`
`)
`
`)
`
`Termination of Marriage, with children -
`
`Termination of Marriage, no children ---- B
`
`) Dissolution of Marriage, with children--
`
`C
`
`) Dissolution of Marriage, no children ----- D
`
`)
`
`Change of Custody -------------------------- E
`
`) Visitation Enforcement/Modification ----
`
`F
`
`(
`)
`Support Enforcement/Modification ------
`G
`*—Complex Litigation --------- G
`
`* Complex Litigation designation
`requires judicial approval. Sup. R. 42
`
`J Other Civil ------------------- H
`
`(
`
`(
`
`(
`
`) Domestic Violence -------------------------- H
`
`)
`
`)
`
` ULLENS.A,----------------------2222222222222
`
`I
`
` AITl Others ------------------------------------ K
`
`PLEASE PRINT OR TYPE THE INFORMATION REQUESTED BELOW
`
`TRIAL ATTORNEY:
`£8104.Spadafore
`DATE:_02/06/2022
`
`Ohio Supreme Court
`Registration No.:
`
`(0081279)
`
`Address: Spadafore Law, LLC
`
`6545 McVey Blvd
`
`Columbus, Ohio 43235
`
`Telephone: 614-441-1255
`
`Fax Number:
`
`Email Address:
`
`C’aig@spadaforelaw.com
`
`CLERK OF COURTS - DELAWARE COUNTY, OH -
`22 CV H 02 0053 - GORMLEY, DAVID M
`
`COMMON PLEAS COURT
`
`FILED: 02/06/2022 02:42 PM
`
`

`

`Case: 2:22-cv-01418-MHW-KAJ Doc #: 1-1 Filed: 03/08/22 Page: 11 of 17 PAGEID #: 15
`Case: 2:22-cv-01418-MHW-KAJ Doc #: 1-1 Filed: 03/08/22 Page: 11 of 17 PAGEID #: 15
`
`IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS
`
`DELAWARE COUNTY, OHIO
`
`INSTRUCTIONS FOR SERVICE
`
`Sabina R. Koehler
`
`The Anthem Companies, Inc.
`
`PLAINTIFF(S)
`Vs.
`
`DEFENDANT(S)
`
`CASE NO.
`
`TO THE CLERK OF COURTS, YOU ARE INSTRUCTED TO MAKE:
`CERTIFIED MAIL SERVICEX
`
`ORDINARY MAIL SERVICE___
`
`PERSONALSERVICE BY THE SHERIFF OF
`
`RESIDENCE SERVICE BY THE SHERIFF OF
`
`PERSONAL SERVICE BY PROCESS SERVER
`
`RESIDENCE SERVICE BY PROCESS SERVER
`
`COUNTY
`
`COUNTY
`
`OF THE FOLLOWING DOCUMENTS: Complaint and Summons
`
`UPON:
`
`The Anthem Companies, Inc.
`
`(NAME #1)
`8940 Lyra Drive, Suite 300
`
`(ADDRESS)
`
`Columbus, Ohio 43240
`
`(CITY-STATE-ZIP CODE)
`
`The Anthem Companies, Inc.
`
`(NAME #2)
`c/o CT Corp. System
`
`(ADDRESS)
`4400 Easton Commons Way, Suite 125
`
`Columbus, Ohio 43219
`
`(CITY-STATE-ZIP CODE)
`
`(NAME #3)
`
`(ADDRESS)
`
`(NAME #4)
`
`(ADDRESS)
`
`(CITY-STATE-ZIP CODE)
`
`(CITY-STATE-ZIP CODE)
`
`Craig J. Spadafore (0081279)
`
`Attorney Name and SupremeCourt I.D. No.
`614-441-1255
`
`Phone Number
`
`Spadafore Law, LLC, 6545 McVey Blvd, Columbus, OH 43235
`
`Address,City, State, Zip Code
`
`CLERK OF COURTS - DELAWARE COUNTY, OH -
`22 CV H 02 0053 - GORMLEY, DAVID M
`
`COMMON PLEAS COURT
`
`FILED: 02/06/2022 02:42 PM
`
`

`

`Case: 2:22-cv-01418-MHW-KAJ Doc #: 1-1 Filed: 03/08/22 Page: 12 of 17 PAGEID #: 16
`Case: 2:22-cv-01418-MHW-KAJ Doc #: 1-1 Filed: 03/08/22 Page: 12 of 17 PAGEID #: 16
`
`IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS DELAWARE COUNTY, OHIO
`
`Plaintiff(s):
`SABINA R KOEHLER
`444 HEATHER LANE
`POWELL,OH 43065
`
`SUMMONS
`
`Case Number: 22 CV H 02 0053
`
`VS
`
`Defendant(s):
`ANTHEM COMPANIES INC
`C/O CT CORP SYSTEM - REG AGENT
`4400 EASTON COMMONS WAYSTE
`125
`COLUMBUS, OH 43219
`
`TOTHEABOVENAMEDDEFENDANT:
`
`CO i
`
`You are hereby summonedthat a complaint (a copy of whichis hereto attached and made
`a part hereof) has beenfiled against you in this court by the plaintiff(s) named herein.
`
`You are required to serve upon the plaintiff(s) attorney, or upon the plaintiff(s) if
`he/she/they have/has no attorney of record, a copy of your answerto the complaint within twenty-
`eight (28) days after service of this summons upon you, exclusive of the day of service. Said
`answer mustbefiled with this court within three (3) days after service on plaintiff(s) attorney.
`
`The nameand address ofthe plaintiff(s) attorney is as follows:
`
`CRAIG J SPADAFORE
`513 E RICH STREET
`COLUMBUS, OH 43215
`
`If you fail to appear and defend, judgment by default will be taken against you for
`the relief demanded in the complaint.
`
`Date: February 7, 2022
`
`
`
`rearFravel, : Natalie
`
`ertified Article Number
`Delaware County Clerk of Courts
`Bate TON e635 a
`sincnat
`
`Saat
`
`,
`
`2
`
`Deputy Clerk
`
`

`

`Case: 2:22-cv-01418-MHW-KAJ Doc #: 1-1 Filed: 03/08/22 Page: 13 of 17 PAGEID #: 17
`Case: 2:22-cv-01418-MHW-KAJ Doc #: 1-1 Filed: 03/08/22 Page: 13 of 17 PAGEID #: 17
`
`IN THE COURT OF COMMONPLEAS DELAWARE COUNTY, OHIO
`
`SUMMONS
`
`Case Number: 22 CV H 02 0053
`
`Plaintiff(s):
`SABINA R KOEHLER
`444 HEATHER LANE
`POWELL, OH 43065
`
`VS
`
`Defendant(s):
`ANTHEM COMPANIESINC
`8940 LYRA DRIVE STE 300
`COLUMBUS, OH 43240
`
`TO THE ABOVE NAMED DEFENDANT:
`
`cor*
`
`You are hereby summonedthat a complaint (a copy of whichis hereto attached and made
`a part hereof) has beenfiled against you in this court by the plaintiff(s) named herein.
`
`You are required to serve upon the plaintiff(s) attorney, or upon the plaintiff(s) if
`he/she/they have/hasno attorney of record, a copy of your answerto the complaint within twenty-
`eight (28) days after service of this summons upon you, exclusive of the day of service. Said
`answer mustbefiled with this court within three (3) days after service on plaintiff(s) attorney.
`
`The name and addressof the plaintiff(s) attorney is as follows:
`
`CRAIG J SPADAFORE
`513 E RICH STREET
`COLUMBUS, OH 43215
`
`If you fail to appear and defend, judgment by default will be taken against you for
`the relief demandedin the complaint.
`
`Date: February 7, 2022
`NatalieFravel
`
`PP
`Po
`Delaware County Clerk of Courts
`117 North Union Street
`Certified Article Number
`|
`Fuhe Feb 9904 2487 8498 97 |
`Delaware, OH 43015
`SENDER’S RECORD
`Oo
`
`Deputy Clerk
`
`

`

`
`Case: 2:22-cv-01418-MHW-KAJ Doc #: 1-1 Filed: 03/08/22 Page: 14 of 17 PAGEID #: 18
`ms Plagent ~
`
`CAddresse
`
`
`
`|D. 1s delivery address different from item 1? [7] Yes
`If YES, enter delivery address below:
`
`
`RIN
`
`9590 Webb FOX Bla? ahaa 83
`
`[CINo
`
`_ Article Addressedto:
`
`ANTHEM COMPANIES INC
`C/O CT.CORP SYSTEM - REG AGENT
`4400 EASTON COMMONS WAY STE 125
`COLUMBUS, OH 43219
`
`22 CV H 02 0053
`
`. Certified Mail (Form 3800) Article Number
`THON PEGE) FIOM eRe? AYR By
`Romenaa Conn ok. ana
`
`z o
`
`Age Type:ol fama g47 [
`ofa3 heeReference Information
`21dMOWWO9
`eeLoa
`CRTSepa 2187 8498 80
`DELAWARE ‘counry COMMON PLEA
`iodine
`iii
`Pid
`iat E}
`Gh bin EER |
`
`

`

`Case: 2:22-cv-01418-MHW-KAJ Doc #: 1-1 Filed: 03/08/22 Page: 15 of 17 PAGEID #: 19
`
`:22-CV-01418-0SPERRACKINGIDC #: 1-1 Filed:|0 /P2 Page:|Bretidsymd?AGE
`]
`:
`: Postage & Fees Paid
`.
`USPS
`'
`Permit'No.G-10
`
`TT.
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`:
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`,
`
`4550 bb S904 2187 8498 83
`United States - Sender: Pleaseprint your name, address and ZIP+4° below @ ,
`PostalService®.
`.
`:
`DelaudesdlsHassallDelelull
`_ CLERK OF COURTS COMMON PLEAS
`DELAWARE COUNTY COURTHOUSE
`' 117 N UNION STREET LEVEL 300.
`DELAWARE OH: 43015
`
`_
`
`.
`
`He“ih;pteyilhsii}egyllayetghoretpedytapegHfbptfdyfl
`
`

`

`Case: 2:22-cv-01418-MHW-KAJ Doc #: 1-1 Filed: 03/08/22 Page: 16 of 17 PAGEID #: 20
`
`ArticleAddressedto:
`
`ANTHEM COMPANIES INC
`8940 LYRA DRIVE STE 300
`COLUMBUS, OH 43240
`
`22 CV H 02 0053
`
`
`
`D. Is deliveryaddressdifferent fram itent1?~f]Yes—
`If YES,enterdelivery address below:
`CINo
`
`9590 §2bb 3404 2147 8498 70
` “immaumn
`
`
`mkfi gad0200
`3 Reference Information
`{
`9 SWld NOHHOS
`HioAaUVAYVIG
`RSET
`. Certified Mail (Form 3800) Article Number
`
`
`
`
`qul4 22Gb) 49au, 2287 aya. 92 |||| OPERWARE! colwry CovNon exe
`10 Danes 8044 Crannimila
`toh, Ont
`Namactir Raturn Rarai
`
`. Exelaeashnologoaiasrenalvad cartifledmal
`
`226679904 2187 8498 97
`
`

`

`Frebasyu@AGE
`Case: 2:22-cv-01418-MHW-KAJ Doc #: 1-1 Filed: 03/08/22 Page: 17 of 17 PAGEID #: 21
`Postage & Fees Paid
`’|USPS
`Permit No. G-10
`
`“iMnARaAlitmetfee.
`
`
`:22--cv-01418AT
`
`
`
`
`4590 92bb 104 2147, Bua 40
`United States eSender: Please printyour name, address and ZIP+4°below e
`
`
`
`Postal Service®.
`
`dutalllsudlltiball
`
`CLERK OF COURTS COMMON PLEAS
`
`.
`
`DELAWARE: COUNTY COURTHOUSE
`117 N UNION STREET LEVEL 300
`DELAWARE OH 43015
`‘wtyttttt
`
`

This document is available on Docket Alarm but you must sign up to view it.


Or .

Accessing this document will incur an additional charge of $.

After purchase, you can access this document again without charge.

Accept $ Charge
throbber

Still Working On It

This document is taking longer than usual to download. This can happen if we need to contact the court directly to obtain the document and their servers are running slowly.

Give it another minute or two to complete, and then try the refresh button.

throbber

A few More Minutes ... Still Working

It can take up to 5 minutes for us to download a document if the court servers are running slowly.

Thank you for your continued patience.

This document could not be displayed.

We could not find this document within its docket. Please go back to the docket page and check the link. If that does not work, go back to the docket and refresh it to pull the newest information.

Your account does not support viewing this document.

You need a Paid Account to view this document. Click here to change your account type.

Your account does not support viewing this document.

Set your membership status to view this document.

With a Docket Alarm membership, you'll get a whole lot more, including:

  • Up-to-date information for this case.
  • Email alerts whenever there is an update.
  • Full text search for other cases.
  • Get email alerts whenever a new case matches your search.

Become a Member

One Moment Please

The filing “” is large (MB) and is being downloaded.

Please refresh this page in a few minutes to see if the filing has been downloaded. The filing will also be emailed to you when the download completes.

Your document is on its way!

If you do not receive the document in five minutes, contact support at support@docketalarm.com.

Sealed Document

We are unable to display this document, it may be under a court ordered seal.

If you have proper credentials to access the file, you may proceed directly to the court's system using your government issued username and password.


Access Government Site

We are redirecting you
to a mobile optimized page.





Document Unreadable or Corrupt

Refresh this Document
Go to the Docket

We are unable to display this document.

Refresh this Document
Go to the Docket