Case 2:24-cv-01460-KSM Document 1 Filed 04/08/24 Page 1 of 11
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Counsel for Plaintiff
`
`
`
`KOLLER LAW LLC
`David M. Koller, Esq. (90119)
`Jordan D. Santo, Esq. (320573)
`2043 Locust Street, Suite 1B
`Philadelphia, PA 19103
`T: (215) 545-8917
`F: (215) 575-0826
`davidk@kollerlawfirm.com
`jordans@kollerlawfirm.com
`
`
`IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
`FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA
`RIVER PATRASCU,
`
`
`:
`
`780 S 52nd Street, Apartment 523
`
`:
`Philadelphia, PA 19143
`
`:
`
`
`
`Plaintiff,
`
`
`:
`:
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`v.
`
`
`
`
`:
`
`
`
`
`
`
`:
`PATH CCM,
`
`
`
`:
`4470 W Sunset Boulevard, Suite 107
`:
`Los Angeles, CA 94731
`
`
`:
`
`
`Defendant.
`
`
`:
`
`
`Civil Action No.
`
`Complaint and Jury Demand
`
` CIVIL ACTION
`
`Plaintiff, River Patrascu (hereinafter “Plaintiff”), by and through his attorney, Koller Law,
`
`
`
`LLC, bring this civil matter against Path CCM (hereinafter “Defendant”), for violations of the
`
`Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990 (“ADA”), as amended, and the Pennsylvania Human
`
`Relations Act (“PHRA”). In support thereof, Plaintiff avers as follows:
`
`THE PARTIES
`
`1. Plaintiff is an adult individual residing at the above captioned address.
`
`2. Upon information and belief, Defendant is a fully remote healthcare company that partners
`
`patients and providers with a location and corporate headquarters located at 4470 W Sunset
`
`Boulevard, Suite 107, Los Angeles, CA 94731.
`
`3. At all times relevant hereto, Defendant employed managers, supervisors, agents, and
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Counsel for Plaintiff
`
`
`
`KOLLER LAW LLC
`David M. Koller, Esq. (90119)
`Jordan D. Santo, Esq. (320573)
`2043 Locust Street, Suite 1B
`Philadelphia, PA 19103
`T: (215) 545-8917
`F: (215) 575-0826
`davidk@kollerlawfirm.com
`jordans@kollerlawfirm.com
`
`
`IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
`FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA
`RIVER PATRASCU,
`
`
`:
`
`780 S 52nd Street, Apartment 523
`
`:
`Philadelphia, PA 19143
`
`:
`
`
`
`Plaintiff,
`
`
`:
`:
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`v.
`
`
`
`
`:
`
`
`
`
`
`
`:
`PATH CCM,
`
`
`
`:
`4470 W Sunset Boulevard, Suite 107
`:
`Los Angeles, CA 94731
`
`
`:
`
`
`Defendant.
`
`
`:
`
`
`Civil Action No.
`
`Complaint and Jury Demand
`
` CIVIL ACTION
`
`Plaintiff, River Patrascu (hereinafter “Plaintiff”), by and through his attorney, Koller Law,
`
`
`
`LLC, bring this civil matter against Path CCM (hereinafter “Defendant”), for violations of the
`
`Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990 (“ADA”), as amended, and the Pennsylvania Human
`
`Relations Act (“PHRA”). In support thereof, Plaintiff avers as follows:
`
`THE PARTIES
`
`1. Plaintiff is an adult individual residing at the above captioned address.
`
`2. Upon information and belief, Defendant is a fully remote healthcare company that partners
`
`patients and providers with a location and corporate headquarters located at 4470 W Sunset
`
`Boulevard, Suite 107, Los Angeles, CA 94731.
`
`3. At all times relevant hereto, Defendant employed managers, supervisors, agents, and
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Case 2:24-cv-01460-KSM Document 1 Filed 04/08/24 Page 2 of 11
`
`
`
`
`employees who Plaintiff alleges had the authority to make decisions concerning Plaintiff’s
`
`employment. In making said decisions, these individuals engaged in the pattern and
`
`practice of discriminatory treatment, which forms the basis of Plaintiff’s allegations in the
`
`instant Complaint.
`
`4. At all times relevant hereto, Defendant employed managers, supervisors, agents, and
`
`employees who acted directly or indirectly in the interest of the employer. In so acting,
`
`these individuals engaged in the pattern and practice of discriminatory treatment, which
`
`forms the basis of Plaintiff’s allegations in the instant Complaint.
`
`JURISDICTION AND VENUE
`
`5. The Court may properly maintain personal jurisdiction over Defendant because the
`
`Defendant’s contacts with this state and this judicial district are sufficient for the exercise
`
`of jurisdiction and comply with traditional notions of fair play and substantial justice, thus
`
`satisfying the standard set forth by the United States Supreme Court in International Shoe
`
`Co. v. Washington, 326 U.S. 310 (1945) and its progeny.
`
`6. The Court may exercise original subject-matter jurisdiction over the instant action pursuant
`
`to 28 U.S.C. §§ 1331 and 1343(a)(4) because it arises under the laws of the United States
`
`and seeks redress for violations of federal law.
`
`7. The Court may also maintain supplemental jurisdiction over state law claims set forth herein
`
`pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1367(a) and Rule 18(a) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure
`
`because they are sufficiently related to one or more claims within the Court’s original
`
`jurisdiction that they form part of the same case or controversy.
`
`8. Venue is properly laid in the Eastern District of Pennsylvania pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §§
`
`1391(b)(1) and 1391(b)(2) because the Plaintiff is domiciled in this judicial district, the
`
`2
`
`
`
`Case 2:24-cv-01460-KSM Document 1 Filed 04/08/24 Page 3 of 11
`
`
`
`
`Defendant is located in this judicial district and because all of the acts and/or omissions
`
`giving rise to the claims set forth herein occurred in this judicial district.
`
`EXHAUSTION OF ADMINISTRATIVE REMEDIES
`
`9. Plaintiff exhausted her administrative remedies under the ADA and the PHRA.
`
`10. Plaintiff timely filed a Charge of Discrimination (“Charge”) with the U.S. Equal
`
`Employment Opportunity Commission (“EEOC”) alleging disability discrimination and
`
`retaliation against Defendant.
`
`11. The Complaint was assigned a Charge Number 530-2023-05595 and was dual filed with
`
`the Pennsylvania Human Relations Commission (“PHRC”).
`
`12. The EEOC issued Plaintiff a Dismissal and Notice of Rights (“Right to Sue”) on request
`
`relative to the Charge and that Notice is dated January 9, 2024. Plaintiff received the Notice
`
`by electronic mail.
`
`13. Prior to the filing of this action, Plaintiff notified the EEOC of his intent to proceed with a
`
`lawsuit in federal court.
`
`14. Plaintiff files the instant Complaint within ninety (90) days of his receipt of his Right to
`
`Sue in this matter.
`
`15. Plaintiff has exhausted his administrative remedies as to the allegations of this Complaint.
`
`MATERIAL FACTS
`
`16. Plaintiff incorporates the preceding paragraphs as if set forth more fully at length herein.
`
`17. On or around January 3, 2022, Defendant hired Plaintiff in the position of Operations &
`
`Growth Associate.
`
`18. Plaintiff was well qualified for his position and performed well.
`
`19. Plaintiff had been referred to Defendant by Joseph Vozobule, Growth Marketing Manager.
`
`3
`
`
`
`Case 2:24-cv-01460-KSM Document 1 Filed 04/08/24 Page 4 of 11
`
`
`
`
`20. From January 2022 to April 2022, Plaintiff reported to Vozobule without issue.
`
`21. In April 2022, Defendant transferred Plaintiff to a new team, under the supervision of
`
`Aidan Quealy, Credentialing Lead.
`
`22. Throughout 2022, Plaintiff was diagnosed with COVID-19 four (4) separate times and was
`
`hospitalized twice due to dangerously low oxygen levels.
`
`23. COVID-19 is a medical condition that is considered a disability under the Americans with
`
`Disabilities Act of 1990 (“ADA”) and the Pennsylvania Human Relations Act (“PHRA”)
`
`as it affects the major life activities, including, but not limited to, breathing and respiratory
`
`function.
`
`24. While under the supervision of Vozobule, Plaintiff missed days as needed without issue
`
`for his diagnosis of COVID-19.
`
`25. However, after April 2022, Quealy began forcing Plaintiff to take PTO sick leave when he
`
`was diagnosed with COVID-19 and/or hospitalized.
`
`26. Importantly, Defendant did not have a policy surrounding paid leave or sick leave at the
`
`time.
`
`27. In the summer of 2022, Quealy stated that she needed more clarity about Plaintiff’s leave,
`
`to which he obliged.
`
`28. Despite this, in or around September 2022, Jessica Garon, Human Resource Benefits and
`
`Compliance Manager, informed Plaintiff that he could take three (3) weeks of paid leave
`
`before he would have to file for Intermittent Family and Medical Leave Act (“FMLA”)
`
`leave.
`
`29. Plaintiff did just this.
`
`30. However, Quealy became outwardly annoyed by Plaintiff’s sick leave.
`
`4
`
`
`
`Case 2:24-cv-01460-KSM Document 1 Filed 04/08/24 Page 5 of 11
`
`
`
`
`31. Beyond this, beginning in July 2022, Plaintiff noticed that Quealy would not let Plaintiff
`
`communicate with his team members.
`
`32. Essentially, Quealy began wedging Plaintiff out, gatekeeping him from communicating
`
`across teams in general.
`
`33. This made it very difficult for Plaintiff to perform his job duties, and set him up to fail.
`
`34. During a performance evaluation, Quealy told Plaintiff that he needed to work on cross
`
`functional communication, but Quealy proceeded to reprimand Plaintiff whenever he CC’d
`
`another department on an email chain.
`
`35. In October 2022, Quealy spoke highly of Plaintiff’s improvements within the company.
`
`36. However, in December 2022, Quealy’s discriminatory and retaliatory conduct worsened
`
`after Plaintiff was forced to take a medical leave through Tilt, Defendant’s third-party
`
`benefits administrator.
`
`37. Thereafter, Quealy began to nitpick Plaintiff’s work product, claim that assignments were
`
`falling through the cracks and that Plaintiff was too verbose in his messages.
`
`38. In January 2023, Plaintiff was hospitalized for one (1) day due to COVID-19 and
`
`dangerously low oxygen levels.
`
`39. At this time, Quealy informed Plaintiff that he must be in contact with Garon regarding
`
`paperwork required for his Intermittent FMLA leave.
`
`40. Plaintiff began contacting Dr. Emily Littman, Pulmonologist, to fill out the required
`
`paperwork for the leave.
`
`41. However, On January 19, 2023, Quealy placed Plaintiff on a Performance Improvement
`
`Plan (“PIP”) before Plaintiff could finalize the required paperwork.
`
`5
`
`
`
`Case 2:24-cv-01460-KSM Document 1 Filed 04/08/24 Page 6 of 11
`
`
`
`
`42. Immediately thereafter, Rachel Greenspan, Senior Manager of People Operations, offered
`
`Plaintiff a severance package if he agreed to resign on February 1, 2023.
`
`43. Significantly, before signing his PIP, Plaintiff complained to Greenspan of Quealy’s
`
`discriminatory conduct.
`
`44. Greenspan agreed to host another Zoom meeting as a third party.
`
`45. During this meeting, Quealy stated that she would not change, and that Plaintiff did not
`
`meet her expectations as a Senior Associate.
`
`46. Plaintiff felt that the PIP was retaliation for his complaint of discrimination but agreed to
`
`accept the PIP the following day.
`
`47. Plaintiff remained confident that he could show his improvements in the fields Greenspan
`
`addressed with him so as to keep his job.
`
`48. On February 1, 2023, Quealy sent Plaintiff an email reprimanding him that he needed to
`
`do better, because of a single typo in a draft template.
`
`49. The next day, on February 2, 2023, Greenspan terminated Plaintiff for his alleged failure
`
`to improve his work performance.
`
`50. Plaintiff was not given the chance to show his improvement after he was issued the PIP
`
`just two (2) weeks earlier.
`
`51. It is Plaintiff’s position that he was terminated due to his disability and retaliated against
`
`for requesting the reasonable accommodation of a medical leave of absence and reporting
`
`discrimination in violation of the ADA and the PHRA.
`
`COUNT I – DISABILITY DISCRIMINATION
`AMERICANS WITH DISABILITIES ACT OF 1990, AS AMENDED
`
`52. Plaintiff incorporates the preceding paragraphs as if set forth more fully at length herein.
`
`53. Plaintiff is a “qualified individual with a disability” as that term is defined under the
`
`6
`
`
`
`Case 2:24-cv-01460-KSM Document 1 Filed 04/08/24 Page 7 of 11
`
`
`
`
`ADA because Plaintiff has, or had at all time relevant hereto, a disability that
`
`substantially limits or limited one or more major life activities or because Plaintiff had a
`
`record of such an impairment or because Plaintiff was regarded as and/or perceived by
`
`Plaintiff and its agents as being disabled.
`
`54. Plaintiff was qualified to perform the job.
`
`55. Plaintiff was subject to an adverse employment action, including, but not limited to,
`
`termination.
`
`56. Circumstances indicated that Plaintiff’s disabilities were the reason for the adverse
`
`employment action.
`
`57. Defendant did not have a legitimate non-discriminatory reason for terminating Plaintiff.
`
`58. Plaintiff’s disabilities motivated Defendant’s decision to terminate Plaintiff.
`
`59. The purported reason for Defendant’s decision is pretextual.
`
`60. Others similarly situated but outside of Plaintiff’s protected class were treated more
`
`favorably.
`
`61. As a result of Defendant’s unlawful disability discrimination, Plaintiff suffered damages
`
`as set forth herein.
`
`WHEREFORE, Plaintiff seeks the damages set forth in the Prayer for Relief clause of this
`
`Complaint, infra.
`
`COUNT II – DISABILITY DISCRIMINATION
`PENNSYLVANIA HUMAN RELATIONS ACT
`
`62. Plaintiff incorporates the preceding paragraphs as if set forth more fully at length herein.
`
`63. Plaintiff is a “qualified individual with a disability” as that term is defined under the
`
`PHRA because Plaintiff has, or had at all time relevant hereto, a disability that
`
`substantially limits or limited one or more major life activities or because Plaintiff had a
`
`7
`
`
`
`Case 2:24-cv-01460-KSM Document 1 Filed 04/08/24 Page 8 of 11
`
`
`
`
`record of such an impairment or because Plaintiff was regarded as and/or perceived by
`
`Plaintiff and its agents as being disabled.
`
`64. Plaintiff was qualified to perform the job.
`
`65. Plaintiff was subject to an adverse employment action, including, but not limited to,
`
`termination.
`
`66. Circumstances indicated that Plaintiff’s disabilities were the reason for the adverse
`
`employment action.
`
`67. Defendant did not have a legitimate non-discriminatory reason for terminating Plaintiff.
`
`68. Plaintiff’s disabilities motivated Defendant’s decision to terminate Plaintiff.
`
`69. The purported reason for Defendant’s decision is pretextual.
`
`70. Others similarly situated but outside of Plaintiff’s protected class were treated more
`
`favorably.
`
`71. As a result of Defendant’s unlawful disability discrimination, Plaintiff suffered damages
`
`as set forth herein.
`
`WHEREFORE, Plaintiff seeks the damages set forth in the Prayer for Relief clause of this
`
`Complaint, infra.
`
`COUNT III – RETALIATION
`AMERICANS WITH DISABILITIES ACT OF 1990, AS AMENDED
`
`72. Plaintiff incorporates all the above paragraphs as if they were set forth at length herein.
`
`73. Plaintiff engaged in activity protected by the ADA when he requested a reasonable
`
`accommodation and reported disability discrimination.
`
`74. Thereafter, Defendant took adverse employment actions against Plaintiff, including, but
`
`not limited to, termination.
`
`75. There exists a causal connection between Plaintiff’s participation of the protected activity
`
`8
`
`
`
`Case 2:24-cv-01460-KSM Document 1 Filed 04/08/24 Page 9 of 11
`
`
`
`
`and the adverse employment action.
`
`WHEREFORE, Plaintiff seeks the damages set forth in the Prayer for Relief clause of
`
`this Complaint, infra.
`
`
`
`
`
`COUNT IV – RETALIATION
`PENNSYLVANIA HUMAN RELATIONS ACT
`
`76. Plaintiff incorporates all the above paragraphs as if they were set forth at length herein.
`
`77. Plaintiff engaged in activity protected by the PHRA when he requested a reasonable
`
`accommodation and reported disability discrimination.
`
`78. Thereafter, Defendant took adverse employment actions against Plaintiff, including, but
`
`not limited to, termination.
`
`79. There exists a causal connection between Plaintiff’s participation of the protected activity
`
`and the adverse employment action.
`
`WHEREFORE, Plaintiff seeks the damages set forth in the Prayer for Relief clause of this
`
`Complaint, infra.
`
`
`WHEREFORE, Plaintiff, River Patrascu, requests that the Court grant him the following
`
`PRAYER FOR RELIEF
`
`relief against Defendant:
`
`
`
`
`
`(a)
`
`(b)
`
`(c)
`
`(d)
`
`(e)
`
`Compensatory damages;
`
`Punitive damages;
`
`Liquidated damages;
`
`Emotional pain and suffering;
`
`Reasonable attorneys’ fees;
`
`9
`
`
`
`Case 2:24-cv-01460-KSM Document 1 Filed 04/08/24 Page 10 of 11
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`(f)
`
`(g)
`
`(h)
`
`(i)
`
`
`(j)
`
`(k)
`
`
`(l)
`
`Recoverable costs;
`
`Pre and post judgment interest;
`
`An allowance to compensate for negative tax consequences;
`
`A permanent injunction enjoining Defendant, its directors, officers, employees,
`agents, successors, heirs and assigns, and all persons in active concert or
`participation with it, from engaging in, ratifying, or refusing to correct, employment
`practices which discriminate in violation of the ADA and the PHRA.
`
`Order Defendant to institute and implement, and for its employees, to attend and/or
`otherwise participate in, training programs, policies, practices and programs which
`provide equal employment opportunities;
`
`Order Defendant to remove and expunge, or to cause to be removed and expunged,
`all negative, discriminatory, and/or defamatory memoranda and documentation
`from Plaintiff’s record of employment, including, but not limited, the pre-textual
`reasons cited for its adverse actions, disciplines, and termination; and
`
`Awarding extraordinary, equitable and/or injunctive relief as permitted by law,
`equity and the federal statutory provisions sued hereunder, pursuant to Rules 64 and
`65 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure.
`
`JURY TRIAL DEMAND
`
`Demand is hereby made for a trial by jury as to all issues.
`
`
`
`CERTIFICATION
`
`I hereby certify that to the best of my knowledge and belief the above matter in controversy
`
`is not the subject of any other action pending in any court or of a pending arbitration proceeding,
`
`nor at the present time is any other action or arbitration proceeding contemplated.
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`10
`
`
`
`Case 2:24-cv-01460-KSM Document 1 Filed 04/08/24 Page 11 of 11
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Date: April 8, 2024
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`By:
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED,
`
`KOLLER LAW, LLC
`
`
`/s/ David M. Koller
`
`David M. Koller, Esquire
`Jordan D. Santo, Esquire
`2043 Locust Street, Suite 1B
`Philadelphia, PA 19103
`215-545-8917
`davidk@kollerlawfirm.com
`jordans@kollerlawfirm.com
`
`Counsel for Plaintiff
`
`11
`
`
Accessing this document will incur an additional charge of $.
After purchase, you can access this document again without charge.
Accept $ Charge
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.
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.
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
