Upload
ben-meiselas
View
390
Download
0
Embed Size (px)
DESCRIPTION
Joseph Weinberg, diagnosed with MS, uncovered the fraud at Valeant . . . The original Federal complaint that started it all.
Citation preview
- 1 -
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
GE
RA
GO
S &
GE
RA
GO
S, A
PC
H
IST
OR
IC E
NG
INE
CO
. NO
. 28
6
44
So
uth
Fig
ue
ro
a S
tre
et
Lo
s A
ng
ele
s, C
al
ifo
rn
ia 9
00
17
-34
11
GERAGOS & GERAGOS A PROFESSIONAL CORPORATION
LAWYERS HISTORIC ENGINE CO. NO. 28
644 South Figueroa Street Los Angeles, California 90017-3411
Telephone (213) 625-3900 Facsimile (213) 232-3255
MARK J. GERAGOS SBN 108325 BEN J. MEISELAS SBN 277412 TYLER M. ROSS SBN 292263 Attorneys for Plaintiff JOSEPH WEINBERG
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA JOSEPH WEINBERG, an individual; Plaintiff, vs. VALEANT PHARMACEUTICALS INTERNATIONAL, a Delaware corporation; MEDICIS PHARMACEUTICAL CORPORATION, a Delaware corporation; OBAGI MEDICAL PRODUCTS, INC., a Delaware corporation; BAUSCH & LOMB INCORPORATED, a New York corporation; and DOES 1 through 50, inclusive; Defendants.
Case No.: 8:15-cv-1260
COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES:
1. RETALIATION IN VIOLATION OF LABOR CODE § 1102.5(b);
2. RETALIATION IN VIOLATION OF LABOR CODE § 1102.5(c);
3. DISABILITY DISCRIMINATION IN VIOLATION OF GOV. CODE § 12940(a);
4. WRONGFUL TERMINATION; 5. CONSTRUCTIVE DISCHARGE
IN VIOLATION OF PUBLIC POLICY;
6. HARASSMENT IN VIOLATION OF GOV. CODE § 12940;
7. RETALIATION IN VIOLATION OF GOV. CODE § 12940;
8. FAILURE TO MAINTAIN ENVIRONMENT FREE FROM HARASSMENT IN VIOLATION OF GOV. CODE § 12940;
9. INTENTIONAL INFLICTION OF EMOTIONAL DISTRESS;
10. NEGLIGENT INFLICTION OF EMOTIONAL DISTRESS.
DEMAND FOR JURY TRIAL
Case 8:15-cv-01260 Document 1 Filed 08/06/15 Page 1 of 27 Page ID #:1
- 2 -
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
GE
RA
GO
S &
GE
RA
GO
S, A
PC
H
IST
OR
IC E
NG
INE
CO
. NO
. 28
6
44
So
uth
Fig
ue
ro
a S
tre
et
Lo
s A
ng
ele
s, C
al
ifo
rn
ia 9
00
17
-34
11
INTRODUCTION
1. This is an action brought by Plaintiff Joseph Weinberg, one of the
handful of people in the world who has undergone an experimental and wildly
expensive clinical trial treatment for the debilitating and excruciatingly painful
disease, Multiple Sclerosis. Defendant Valeant Pharmaceuticals International and its
subsidiaries named herein publicly claim to be compassionate towards victims of
neurological diseases, but at the same time have shamed Mr. Weinberg and retaliated
against him when he sought assistance, accommodations, and basic human dignity.
Instead of providing life-saving help, Defendants terminated Mr. Weinberg’s
employment and then, to add insult injury, Defendants’ attorneys and representatives
disclaimed any liability for Mr. Weinberg’s injuries and mocked him.
2. Multiple Sclerosis is a devastating disease for which there is no
permanent cure. Multiple Sclerosis causes the body’s own immune system to slowly
destroy the protective coverings of nerves, particularly in the brain and spinal cord.
The diminished motor skills, memory loss, and loss of vision, among other symptoms,
are exacerbated by outside triggers such as stress and mental trauma. It is a painful
and maddening disease, for both the victim and his or her family.
3. During Mr. Weinberg’s employment, he not only refused to participate in
unlawful conduct that risked the exposure of personally-identifiable financial data and
the corruption of records in violation of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, but tried to
alert his employer. Defendants failed to take any remedial action and instead initiated
a campaign of retaliation, harassment, intimidation, and hostility directed towards Mr.
Weinberg. Defendants knew that their conduct would exacerbate the symptoms of
Mr. Weinberg’s Multiple Sclerosis, basically trying to kill the “whistleblower.”
4. Mr. Weinberg would not be coerced. He endured this patent and obvious
attempt to bully him. Eventually, however, Mr. Weinberg was forced to request
accommodations in order to save his life.
5. Instead of granting Mr. Weinberg accommodations, Defendants lured
Case 8:15-cv-01260 Document 1 Filed 08/06/15 Page 2 of 27 Page ID #:2
- 3 -
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
GE
RA
GO
S &
GE
RA
GO
S, A
PC
H
IST
OR
IC E
NG
INE
CO
. NO
. 28
6
44
So
uth
Fig
ue
ro
a S
tre
et
Lo
s A
ng
ele
s, C
al
ifo
rn
ia 9
00
17
-34
11
Mr. Weinberg into a faux human resources meeting, on the pretext of discussing his
illness and accommodations, and served him with separation papers.
6. It is shocking that Defendants, which are pharmaceutical giants, would
attempt to try to torture and abuse Mr. Weinberg.
PARTIES
7. Plaintiff Joseph Weinberg, at all relevant times, was an individual
residing in Maricopa County, Arizona.
8. Defendant Valeant Pharmaceuticals International (“Valeant”), at all
relevant times, was a Delaware corporation registered to do business in the State of
California. Upon information and belief, Valeant maintains offices in the county of
Orange, California. Valeant is an international, multi-billion dollar pharmaceutical
company with its United States headquarters located in Bridgewater, New Jersey.
Upon information and belief, Defendants Medicis Pharmaceutical Corporation, Obagi
Medical Products, Inc., and Bausch & Lomb Incorporated are subsidiaries of Valeant,
and each Defendant is controlled and/or dominated by the others such that all
Defendants are alter-egos of each other.
9. Defendant Medicis Pharmaceutical Corporation (“Medicis”), at all
relevant times, was a Delaware corporation registered to do business in the State of
California. Upon information and belief, Medicis is a subsidiary of Valeant. Medicis
is a pharmaceutical company specializing in medical cosmetics.
10. Defendant Obagi Medical Products, Inc. (“Obagi”), at all relevant times,
was a Delaware corporation with its principal place of business in Irvine, California.
Upon information and belief, Obagi is a subsidiary of Valeant. Obagi is a
pharmaceutical company specializing in dermatology products.
11. Defendant Bausch & Lomb Incorporated (“B&L”), at all relevant times,
was a New York corporation corporation registered to do business in the State of
California. Upon information and belief, B&L maintains offices throughout the state
of California, including Irvine, California. Upon information and belief, B&L is a
Case 8:15-cv-01260 Document 1 Filed 08/06/15 Page 3 of 27 Page ID #:3
- 4 -
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
GE
RA
GO
S &
GE
RA
GO
S, A
PC
H
IST
OR
IC E
NG
INE
CO
. NO
. 28
6
44
So
uth
Fig
ue
ro
a S
tre
et
Lo
s A
ng
ele
s, C
al
ifo
rn
ia 9
00
17
-34
11
subsidiary of Valeant. B&L is a pharmaceutical company specializing in the supply
of eye health products.
12. Plaintiff is unaware of the true names and capacities of the Defendants
named herein as Does 1 through 50, inclusive, and therefore sues said Defendants by
such fictitious names. Plaintiff will seek leave of court to amend this Complaint to
allege the true names and capacities of said Defendants when the same are
ascertained. Plaintiff is informed and believes and thereon alleges that each of the
aforesaid fictitiously named Defendants is responsible in some manner for the
happenings and occurrences hereinafter alleged, and that Plaintiff’s damages and
injuries as herein alleged were caused by the conduct of said Defendants.
JURISDICTION AND VENUE
13. This Court has jurisdiction over this action pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §1332
because the amount in controversy as to Plaintiff exceeds $75,000.00 exclusive of
interest and costs and because at least one Defendant has its principal place of
business in California, a state other than the state in which the named Plaintiff resides.
14. This Court has supplemental jurisdiction over the remaining common law
and state claims pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §1367.
15. Venue is proper in this Court pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §1391 because a
substantial part of the events giving rise to Plaintiff’s claims occurred in the Central
District of California.
FACTUAL ALLEGATIONS
Mr. Weinberg Discloses His Multiple Sclerosis When He Is Hired
16. Beginning in March 2013, Valeant interviewed Mr. Weinberg over a
three-month period for a potential employment position to direct Valeant’s IT
infrastructure. The position would require Mr. Weinberg to perform services for
Valeant and its subsidiaries. Valeant recognized Mr. Weinberg’s extraordinarily
advanced skillset and concluded its six-month nationwide search by offering Mr.
Weinberg the Senior Converged Infrastructure Engineer position. Valeant offered Mr.
Case 8:15-cv-01260 Document 1 Filed 08/06/15 Page 4 of 27 Page ID #:4
- 5 -
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
GE
RA
GO
S &
GE
RA
GO
S, A
PC
H
IST
OR
IC E
NG
INE
CO
. NO
. 28
6
44
So
uth
Fig
ue
ro
a S
tre
et
Lo
s A
ng
ele
s, C
al
ifo
rn
ia 9
00
17
-34
11
Weinberg a base salary of $110,000, undisclosed stock grants, a 10% bonus, and
medical benefits.
17. In considering Valeant’s employment offer, Mr. Weinberg was
concerned about the stable environment and working conditions because he suffers
from the neurological condition Multiple Sclerosis. Mr. Weinberg’s then-employer
had created an environment where Mr. Weinberg could manage his condition and
employment responsibilities, and Mr. Weinberg wanted a similar experience.
18. Mr. Weinberg accepted Valeant’s offer because, in part: (1) Valeant was
a stable company that could provide him and his family extraordinary health benefits;
and (2) Mr. Weinberg believed that a company that manufactured and sold
neurological medications would care and have compassion for a Multiple Sclerosis
patient such as himself.
19. Mr. Weinberg began his employment at Valeant in May, 2013 and
worked directly under the supervision of IT engineering directors Jacob Alao and
Steve Schiavone. At the outset, Mr. Weinberg was enthusiastic and excited about his
position and looked forward to going to work each day. Mr. Weinberg was assigned
to work on a variety of different IT-related projects for Valeant’s numerous
subsidiaries.
20. During this time, Mr. Weinberg and his wife learned that they were
expecting their second child.
21. However, beginning in June, 2013 the severe stress caused by Valeant’s
corporate culture and the unlawful orders given by Mr. Weinberg’s managers caused
him to experience physical manifestations of his Multiple Sclerosis.
Mr. Weinberg Is Ordered To Participate In Fraudulent Conduct While
Performing Services For Medicis
22. Valeant’s failure to control Mr. Weinberg’s supervisor, Jacob Alao,
created a hostile environment. Approximately one month into Mr. Weinberg’s
employment at Valeant, at which time he was assigned to perform services for
Case 8:15-cv-01260 Document 1 Filed 08/06/15 Page 5 of 27 Page ID #:5
- 6 -
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
GE
RA
GO
S &
GE
RA
GO
S, A
PC
H
IST
OR
IC E
NG
INE
CO
. NO
. 28
6
44
So
uth
Fig
ue
ro
a S
tre
et
Lo
s A
ng
ele
s, C
al
ifo
rn
ia 9
00
17
-34
11
Medicis, Mr. Alao visited Scottsdale, Arizona to meet with Mr. Weinberg. During
this visit, Mr. Alao told Mr. Weinberg that he had his own Nigerian financial
company called Mongran Financial (“Mongran”), and that Valeant and Mr. Alao’s
prior employers had helped start Mongran.
23. Knowing that Mr. Weinberg had access to Valeant’s Oracle RAC system
used for the financial databases as well as the SAP system, Mr. Alao asked Mr.
Weinberg if he wanted to help “do business” at Valeant by providing access to those
systems. Mr. Weinberg refused to help Mr. Alao, recognizing that providing access to
private financial systems was a violation of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act and PCI security
standards. Mr. Alao’s illegitimate operations exposed Valeant to substantial liability.
24. After Mr. Weinberg refused to comply with Mr. Alao’s demands, Mr.
Alao proceeded to hire numerous consultants, all of whom were “from Nigeria.” Mr.
Weinberg interacted with several of these consultants and recognized that, although
they knew very little about IT systems, they nevertheless wanted to gain access to
financial data and personally-identifiable information. Mr. Weinberg never provided
access to this information to anyone. Nonetheless, because of Mr. Alao’s influential
position in the IT division, he and his consultants gained access to these systems.
Mr. Weinberg Is Retaliated Against For Refusing To Participate In Fraudulent
Conduct While Performing Services For Obagi
25. Mr. Alao’s other hostile conduct was alarming as well. One of Mr.
Weinberg’s assignments required him to perform services for Valeant’s subsidiary,
Obagi. Mr. Alao instructed and insisted Mr. Weinberg perform data migration in
manners that fell below industry standards and, in Mr. Weinberg’s extensive
experience, would cause the data to become corrupt. When Mr. Weinberg voiced
these concerns to Mr. Alao, he insisted and demanded Mr. Weinberg proceed anyway,
going so far as to remotely log-in to Mr. Weinberg’s active computer session, take
control of his mouse, and make changes to the system to ensure corruption and data
loss. Mr. Alao corrupted the data to the point where it became unusable.
Case 8:15-cv-01260 Document 1 Filed 08/06/15 Page 6 of 27 Page ID #:6
- 7 -
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
GE
RA
GO
S &
GE
RA
GO
S, A
PC
H
IST
OR
IC E
NG
INE
CO
. NO
. 28
6
44
So
uth
Fig
ue
ro
a S
tre
et
Lo
s A
ng
ele
s, C
al
ifo
rn
ia 9
00
17
-34
11
26. Mr. Alao became hostile towards Mr. Weinberg after Mr. Weinberg
refused to help Mr. Alao with his Nigerian enterprise and the Obagi matter. For
example, Mr. Alao would intimidate and tell Mr. Weinberg the “bloody” things that
he would do such as fire people for “the fun of the bloodsport,” how Valeant would
conduct hostile takeovers of companies and ruin the lives of the preexisting staff by
giving them termination dates, and how he found it funny that the girlfriend of Jonah
Shacknai, the founder of Medicis, committed suicide by hanging naked from Mr.
Shacknai’s balcony. Mr. Alao’s retaliatory campaign increased in severity over time.
Defendants’ Retaliatory Conduct Causes More Harm To Mr. Weinberg
27. The escalating severity and effects of Mr. Alao’s intimidating and
retaliatory conduct caused the debilitating effects of Multiple Sclerosis to take their
toll on Mr. Weinberg. For example, Mr. Weinberg began to experience difficulty with
his cognitive abilities, numbness in his appendages, and mobility problems, all of
which signaled that he was suffering brain and spinal column damage. Mr. Weinberg
therefore approached Alison Brunger, Valeant’s Director of Human Resources, to
explore these issues so that Mr. Weinberg could continue to work for Valeant.
Valeant never responded to Mr. Weinberg.
28. Mr. Weinberg’s health continued to decline through June and July of
2013. Mr. Weinberg, his family, and his Multiple Sclerosis neurologists feared that
the stressful and hostile environment at Valeant was going to cause brain damage,
diminish his quality of life, and ultimately permanently disable him. Mr. Weinberg’s
only option was to continue working in order to support his family and pay for his
treatments, and therefore he was forced to forego using a more effective medication in
favor of a less effective medication that would allow him to continue working.
Despite these immense challenges, Mr. Weinberg nonetheless excelled at work.
Defendants Terminate Mr. Weinberg For Requesting Assistance With His
Multiple Sclerosis
29. When Valeant acquired Medicis in 2012, Mr. Weinberg was informed
Case 8:15-cv-01260 Document 1 Filed 08/06/15 Page 7 of 27 Page ID #:7
- 8 -
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
GE
RA
GO
S &
GE
RA
GO
S, A
PC
H
IST
OR
IC E
NG
INE
CO
. NO
. 28
6
44
So
uth
Fig
ue
ro
a S
tre
et
Lo
s A
ng
ele
s, C
al
ifo
rn
ia 9
00
17
-34
11
that his job was safe. Mr. Alao told Mr. Weinberg that he would be given a relocation
package so that Mr. Weinberg could move back to New Jersey and continue his
employment with Valeant. However, Mr. Weinberg learned from former Medicis
employees that they were not awarded relocation packages despite promises
otherwise.
30. As Valeant was well aware of Mr. Weinberg’s health issues, he began to
realize that his job was not safe. His health continued to decline, and in August, 2013,
Mr. Weinberg again contacted Ms. Brunger in order to discuss accommodations. Mr.
Weinberg again informed Ms. Brunger of his failing health and the hostile and
stressful work environment.
31. Instead of discussing accommodations so that Mr. Weinberg could get
treatment, Valeant terminated Mr. Weinberg’s employment at its first opportunity.
32. Ms. Brunger misled Mr. Weinberg into scheduling a meeting to discuss
his health and the work environment in August, 2013. Instead of discussing these
issues at this meeting, Ms. Brunger handed Mr. Weinberg separation papers. She also
stated that the Senior Vice President of IT approved Mr. Weinberg taking unpaid time
off. However, Mr. Weinberg could not afford to take time off as he was obligated to
care for his family as well as pay for his costly treatments. Thereafter, Valeant
terminated Mr. Weinberg’s employment. Mr. Weinberg was forced to seek new
employment quickly as he and his family were expecting their second child.
Mr. Weinberg’s Injuries Following Defendants’ Wrongful Termination.
33. Consequently Mr. Weinberg was left with no income and Valeant
COBRA insurance that cost him over $1,600 per month, putting the Weinberg family
into a dire financial situation. Mr. Weinberg’s Multiple Sclerosis worsened and
diminished his cognitive ability even further. Mr. Weinberg was forced to sell his
house, car, and stocks, as well as cash out his 401k in order to live.
34. In addition, an MRI in October of 2013 revealed four lesions on Mr.
Weinberg’s brain, crippling his ability to function, despite his young age, as well as
Case 8:15-cv-01260 Document 1 Filed 08/06/15 Page 8 of 27 Page ID #:8
- 9 -
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
GE
RA
GO
S &
GE
RA
GO
S, A
PC
H
IST
OR
IC E
NG
INE
CO
. NO
. 28
6
44
So
uth
Fig
ue
ro
a S
tre
et
Lo
s A
ng
ele
s, C
al
ifo
rn
ia 9
00
17
-34
11
his ability to find another job. Sadly, the long-lasting mental and physical pain
inflicted upon Mr. Weinberg’s as a result of the stressful environment at Valeant was
so great that he contemplated suicide. Thankfully, he decided against taking his own
life.
35. The Weinberg family then moved to Utah with Mr. Weinberg’s in-laws
so that Mr. Weinberg could focus on healing. In the spring of 2014, Mr. Weinberg
was prescribed Rituxan from the Barrow Neurological Institute. When Mr. Weinberg
attempted to receive treatment, Valeant’s COBRA insurance denied coverage. Mr.
Weinberg could not afford, and therefore could not receive, this life-saving treatment.
Mr. Weinberg instead was prescribed Tysabri, which has a high and potentially fatal
risk of brain damage, because it was covered by Valeant’s COBRA insurance.
36. In October of 2013, Mr. Weinberg’s oldest son started showing signs of
erratic behavior and shortly thereafter was diagnosed with Autism. The next month,
Mr. Weinberg’s second child was born. Due to the financial situation caused by
Valeant’s wrongful termination, Mr. Weinberg could not afford the Autism treatments
for his oldest son. As a result, Mr. Weinberg’s oldest son is now non-verbal and will
likely never lead a normal life. But for Valeant’s wrongful termination, Mr. Weinberg
would have been able to afford early intervention medical treatments for his son.
FIRST CAUSE OF ACTION
RETALIATION IN VIOLATION OF LABOR CODE § 1102.5(b)
(Plaintiff Against All Defendants)
37. Plaintiff realleges and incorporates as if fully stated herein each and
every allegation contained above and incorporates the same herein by this reference as
though set forth in full.
38. Plaintiff engaged in protected activity by complaining of and refusing to
participate in violations and fraudulent activities that Defendants and several of their
employees were engaged in.
39. Defendants failed to address Plaintiff’s concerns on numerous occasions.
Case 8:15-cv-01260 Document 1 Filed 08/06/15 Page 9 of 27 Page ID #:9
- 10 -
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
GE
RA
GO
S &
GE
RA
GO
S, A
PC
H
IST
OR
IC E
NG
INE
CO
. NO
. 28
6
44
So
uth
Fig
ue
ro
a S
tre
et
Lo
s A
ng
ele
s, C
al
ifo
rn
ia 9
00
17
-34
11
40. Plaintiff had reasonable cause to believe that Defendants’ constant
fraudulent activities would result in noncompliance with the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of
2002, including other potential illegal activity.
41. As a result of Plaintiff’s refusal to participate in fraudulent and unlawful
activity, Plaintiff suffered unfavorable personnel action(s) by being subjected to
unprecedented scrutiny, harassment, and intimidation.
42. The protected activity was the contributing factor in the unfavorable
personnel action as set forth above, which invariably affected the outcome of
Defendants’ decision to exercise such an unfavorable personnel action(s) against
Plaintiff.
43. Defendants cannot and will not be able to prove by clear and convincing
evidence that such unfavorable employment actions as set forth above would have
been taken in the absence of Plaintiff’s protected behavior and/or conduct in reporting
and opposing Defendants’ pervasive fraudulent activities.
44. Defendants ratified their agents, servants, employees, and authorized
representatives’ unlawful conduct and behavior as described herein by: (1) allowing
the pervasive fraudulent activity to occur without rectifying it despite attempts by
Plaintiff to bring the conduct to Defendants’ attention; (2) condoning the pervasive
fraudulent activities; and (3) condoning the retaliatory measures taken against Plaintiff
by failing to intervene and halt the behavior and actions of Defendants’ employees.
45. As a direct and proximate cause of the tortious, unlawful, and wrongful
acts of Defendants and their respective agents, servants, employees, and authorized
representatives as aforesaid, Plaintiff has suffered past and future special damages,
including impairment of reputation and personal humiliation, and past and future
general damages in an amount according to proof at trial. Plaintiff has been damaged
emotionally and financially, including but not limited to emotional suffering from
emotional distress and ridicule, as well as loss of income and earnings potential.
Plaintiff has also been damaged physically as a result of the retaliatory actions of
Case 8:15-cv-01260 Document 1 Filed 08/06/15 Page 10 of 27 Page ID #:10
- 11 -
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
GE
RA
GO
S &
GE
RA
GO
S, A
PC
H
IST
OR
IC E
NG
INE
CO
. NO
. 28
6
44
So
uth
Fig
ue
ro
a S
tre
et
Lo
s A
ng
ele
s, C
al
ifo
rn
ia 9
00
17
-34
11
Defendants’ employees, which exacerbated Plaintiff’s Multiple Sclerosis.
46. In engaging in the conduct as hereinabove alleged, Defendants and their
agents, servants, employees, and authorized representatives acted with malice, fraud,
and oppression and/or in conscious disregard of Plaintiff’s health, rights, and well-
being, and intended to subject Plaintiff to unjust hardship, thereby warranting an
assessment of punitive damages in an amount sufficient to punish Defendants and
deter others from engaging in similar conduct.
SECOND CAUSE OF ACTION
RETALIATION IN VIOLATION OF LABOR CODE § 1102.5(c)
(Plaintiff Against All Defendants)
47. Plaintiff realleges and incorporates as if fully stated herein each and
every allegation contained above and incorporates the same herein by this reference as
though set forth in full.
48. Plaintiff had reasonable cause to believe that Defendants’ constant
fraudulent activities would result in noncompliance with the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of
2002.
49. Plaintiff was hired to direct Defendants’ IT infrastructure. Plaintiff’s
supervisor, Jacob Alao, demanded and ordered that Plaintiff provide access to private
financial systems to himself and his personal company, Mongran, in violation of the
Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 and PCI security standards.
50. Plaintiff refused to participate or follow Mr. Alao’s orders. Plaintiff
engaged in a protected activity when Plaintiff refused to engage in the fraudulent
activities that Defendants and their employees were engaged in.
51. As a result of Plaintiff’s refusal to participate in fraudulent and unlawful
activity, Plaintiff suffered unfavorable personnel action(s) by being subjected to
unprecedented scrutiny, harassment, and intimidation.
52. The protected activity was the contributing factor in the unfavorable
personnel action as set forth above, which invariably affected the outcome of
Case 8:15-cv-01260 Document 1 Filed 08/06/15 Page 11 of 27 Page ID #:11
- 12 -
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
GE
RA
GO
S &
GE
RA
GO
S, A
PC
H
IST
OR
IC E
NG
INE
CO
. NO
. 28
6
44
So
uth
Fig
ue
ro
a S
tre
et
Lo
s A
ng
ele
s, C
al
ifo
rn
ia 9
00
17
-34
11
Defendants’ decision to exercise such an unfavorable personnel action(s) against
Plaintiff.
53. Defendants cannot and will not be able to prove by clear and convincing
evidence that such unfavorable employment actions as set forth above would have
been taken in the absence of Plaintiff’s protected behavior and/or conduct in reporting
and opposing Defendants’ pervasive fraudulent activities.
54. Defendants ratified their agents, servants, employees, and authorized
representatives’ unlawful conduct and behavior as described herein by: (1) allowing
the pervasive fraudulent activity to occur without rectifying it despite attempts by
Plaintiff to bring the conduct to Defendants’ attention; (2) condoning the pervasive
fraudulent activities; and (3) condoning the retaliatory measures taken against Plaintiff
by failing to intervene and halt the behavior and actions of Defendants’ employees.
55. As a direct and proximate cause of the tortious, unlawful, and wrongful
acts of Defendants and their respective agents, servants, employees, and authorized
representatives as aforesaid, Plaintiff has suffered past and future special damages,
including impairment of reputation and personal humiliation, and past and future
general damages in an amount according to proof at trial. Plaintiff has been damaged
emotionally and financially, including but not limited to emotional suffering from
emotional distress and ridicule, as well as loss of income and earnings potential.
Plaintiff has also been damaged physically as a result of the retaliatory actions of
Defendants’ employees, which exacerbated Plaintiff’s Multiple Sclerosis.
56. In engaging in the conduct as hereinabove alleged, Defendants and their
agents, servants, employees, and authorized representatives acted with malice, fraud,
and oppression and/or in conscious disregard of Plaintiff’s health, rights, and well-
being, and intended to subject Plaintiff to unjust hardship, thereby warranting an
assessment of punitive damages in an amount sufficient to punish Defendants and
deter others from engaging in similar conduct.
Case 8:15-cv-01260 Document 1 Filed 08/06/15 Page 12 of 27 Page ID #:12
- 13 -
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
GE
RA
GO
S &
GE
RA
GO
S, A
PC
H
IST
OR
IC E
NG
INE
CO
. NO
. 28
6
44
So
uth
Fig
ue
ro
a S
tre
et
Lo
s A
ng
ele
s, C
al
ifo
rn
ia 9
00
17
-34
11
THIRD CAUSE OF ACTION
DISABILITY DISCRIMINATION IN VIOLATION OF GOVERNMENT
CODE § 12940(a)
(Plaintiff Against All Defendants)
57. Plaintiff realleges and incorporates as if fully stated herein each and
every allegation contained above and incorporates the same herein by this reference as
though set forth in full.
58. Government Code section 12940(a) states in pertinent part:
It is an unlawful employment practice for an employer, because of the race, religious creed, color, physical disability, age, sexual orientation, or military and veteran status of any person, to discharge the person from employment or to discriminate against the person in compensation or in terms, conditions, or privileges of employment.
59. Defendants intentionally created or knowingly permitted the above-
described working conditions to exist. Plaintiff, who suffers from Multiple Sclerosis,
was discriminated against on account of his disability.
60. Plaintiff was subjected to the above-described discrimination in the
terms, conditions, or privileges of employment in violation of Government Code
section 12940(a).
61. Plaintiff’s disability was a substantial motivating factor for the
discrimination against Plaintiff in the terms, conditions, or privileges of employment.
62. Plaintiff’s disability was a substantial motivating factor for the discharge
of Plaintiff.
63. Defendants terminated Plaintiff in breach of public policy. The
underlying public policy being those articulated in the California Fair Employment
and Housing Act, Government Code section 12900, et seq.
64. Defendants managers, employees, and agents engaged in harassing and
Case 8:15-cv-01260 Document 1 Filed 08/06/15 Page 13 of 27 Page ID #:13
- 14 -
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
GE
RA
GO
S &
GE
RA
GO
S, A
PC
H
IST
OR
IC E
NG
INE
CO
. NO
. 28
6
44
So
uth
Fig
ue
ro
a S
tre
et
Lo
s A
ng
ele
s, C
al
ifo
rn
ia 9
00
17
-34
11
discriminatory conduct with the intent to cause economic and emotional distress to
Plaintiff. As described above, Defendants’ representatives engaged in inappropriate
conduct and created a hostile work environment for Plaintiff by denying him
accommodations, engaging in conduct designed to exacerbate Plaintiff’s Multiple
Sclerosis, and by creating a hostile work environment.
65. Plaintiff’s Multiple Sclerosis was exacerbated by Defendants’ working
conditions. Plaintiff notified Defendants of his Multiple Sclerosis and requested
accommodations. As a result, Plaintiff was terminated.
66. Defendants ratified their agents, servants, employees, and authorized
representatives’ unlawful conduct and behavior as described herein by: (1) allowing
the pervasive fraudulent activity to occur without rectifying it despite attempts by
Plaintiff to bring the conduct to Defendants’ attention; (2) condoning the pervasive
fraudulent activities; and (3) condoning the retaliatory measures taken against Plaintiff
by failing to intervene and halt the behavior and actions of Defendants’ employees.
67. As a direct and proximate cause of the tortious, unlawful, and wrongful
acts of Defendants and their respective agents, servants, employees, and authorized
representatives as aforesaid, Plaintiff has suffered past and future special damages,
including impairment of reputation and personal humiliation, and past and future
general damages in an amount according to proof at trial. Plaintiff has been damaged
emotionally and financially, including but not limited to emotional suffering from
emotional distress and ridicule, as well as loss of income and earnings potential.
Plaintiff has also been damaged physically as a result of the retaliatory actions of
Defendants’ employees, which exacerbated Plaintiff’s Multiple Sclerosis.
68. In engaging in the conduct as hereinabove alleged, Defendants and their
agents, servants, employees, and authorized representatives acted with malice, fraud,
and oppression and/or in conscious disregard of Plaintiff’s health, rights, and well-
being, and intended to subject Plaintiff to unjust hardship, thereby warranting an
assessment of punitive damages in an amount sufficient to punish Defendants and
Case 8:15-cv-01260 Document 1 Filed 08/06/15 Page 14 of 27 Page ID #:14
- 15 -
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
GE
RA
GO
S &
GE
RA
GO
S, A
PC
H
IST
OR
IC E
NG
INE
CO
. NO
. 28
6
44
So
uth
Fig
ue
ro
a S
tre
et
Lo
s A
ng
ele
s, C
al
ifo
rn
ia 9
00
17
-34
11
deter others from engaging in similar conduct.
FOURTH CAUSE OF ACTION
WRONGFUL TERMINATION
(Plaintiff Against All Defendants)
69. Plaintiff realleges and incorporates as if fully stated herein each and
every allegation contained above and incorporates the same herein by this reference as
though set forth in full.
70. Plaintiff endured disability discrimination, harassment and other
offensive conduct described herein during his employment with Defendants.
Defendants terminated Plaintiff in or around August, 2013. Plaintiff’s disability was a
motivating reason for his termination, against California public policy.
71. Defendants were aware, or should have been aware, of the likelihood that
Plaintiff would suffer severe emotional distress as a result of the above-described
outrageous conduct. The outrageous and shocking conduct of Defendants and their
employees was done intentionally and for the purpose of inflicting extreme and severe
emotional distress upon Plaintiff.
72. Defendants knowingly created and intentionally permitted these
intolerable working conditions and failed to take appropriate remedial steps to protect
Plaintiff from discrimination, retaliation, and harassment.
73. Plaintiff was harmed and the requirement that he endure discriminatory
and retaliatory conduct, and other offensive conduct as described herein during the
course of his employment, was a substantial factor in causing Plaintiff’s harm.
74. Plaintiff’s termination from his employment was rooted in violation of
public policy embodied in California’s Fair Employment and Housing Act,
Government Code section 12900, et seq.
75. Defendants ratified their agents, servants, employees, and authorized
representatives’ unlawful conduct and behavior as described herein by: (1) allowing
the pervasive fraudulent activity to occur without rectifying it despite attempts by
Case 8:15-cv-01260 Document 1 Filed 08/06/15 Page 15 of 27 Page ID #:15
- 16 -
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
GE
RA
GO
S &
GE
RA
GO
S, A
PC
H
IST
OR
IC E
NG
INE
CO
. NO
. 28
6
44
So
uth
Fig
ue
ro
a S
tre
et
Lo
s A
ng
ele
s, C
al
ifo
rn
ia 9
00
17
-34
11
Plaintiff to bring the conduct to Defendants’ attention; (2) condoning the pervasive
fraudulent activities; and (3) condoning the retaliatory measures taken against Plaintiff
by failing to intervene and halt the behavior and actions of Defendants’ employees.
76. As a direct and proximate cause of the tortious, unlawful, and wrongful
acts of Defendants and their respective agents, servants, employees, and authorized
representatives as aforesaid, Plaintiff has suffered past and future special damages,
including impairment of reputation and personal humiliation, and past and future
general damages in an amount according to proof at trial. Plaintiff has been damaged
emotionally and financially, including but not limited to emotional suffering from
emotional distress and ridicule, as well as loss of income and earnings potential.
Plaintiff has also been damaged physically as a result of the retaliatory actions of
Defendants’ employees, which exacerbated Plaintiff’s Multiple Sclerosis.
77. In engaging in the conduct as hereinabove alleged, Defendants and their
agents, servants, employees, and authorized representatives acted with malice, fraud,
and oppression and/or in conscious disregard of Plaintiff’s health, rights, and well-
being, and intended to subject Plaintiff to unjust hardship, thereby warranting an
assessment of punitive damages in an amount sufficient to punish Defendants and
deter others from engaging in similar conduct.
FIFTH CAUSE OF ACTION
CONSTRUCTIVE DISCHARGE IN VIOLATION OF PUBLIC POLICY
(Plaintiff Against All Defendants)
78. Plaintiff realleges and incorporates as if fully stated herein each and
every allegation contained above and incorporates the same herein by this reference as
though set forth in full.
79. Constructive discharge occurs when the employer’s conduct is so
egregious that it effectively compels the employee to resign. The employer must
either intentionally create or knowingly permit working conditions that are so
intolerable at the time of the employee's resignation, that a reasonable person in the
Case 8:15-cv-01260 Document 1 Filed 08/06/15 Page 16 of 27 Page ID #:16
- 17 -
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
GE
RA
GO
S &
GE
RA
GO
S, A
PC
H
IST
OR
IC E
NG
INE
CO
. NO
. 28
6
44
So
uth
Fig
ue
ro
a S
tre
et
Lo
s A
ng
ele
s, C
al
ifo
rn
ia 9
00
17
-34
11
employee's position would be compelled to resign.
80. It is the express fundamental public policy of the State of California that
employers may not discriminate against employees because of their physical
disability, gender, age, or religious creed.
81. Plaintiff was required to endure disability discrimination and other
offensive conduct described herein during his employment with Defendants. Plaintiff
was subjected to discriminatory conduct that was so severe, widespread, and persistent
that any reasonable employee would have considered his work environment to be
abusive. Plaintiff’s resignation of his employment was constructive termination of his
employment. Defendants’ constructive termination of Plaintiff’s employment because
of his disability and request for accommodations is a violation of California's
fundamental public policy and is therefore a wrongful employment termination in
violation of public policy.
82. Defendants ratified their agents, servants, employees, and authorized
representatives’ unlawful conduct and behavior as described herein by: (1) allowing
the pervasive fraudulent activity to occur without rectifying it despite attempts by
Plaintiff to bring the conduct to Defendants’ attention; (2) condoning the pervasive
fraudulent activities; and (3) condoning the retaliatory measures taken against Plaintiff
by failing to intervene and halt the behavior and actions of Defendants’ employees.
83. As a direct and proximate cause of the tortious, unlawful, and wrongful
acts of Defendants and their respective agents, servants, employees, and authorized
representatives as aforesaid, Plaintiff has suffered past and future special damages,
including impairment of reputation and personal humiliation, and past and future
general damages in an amount according to proof at trial. Plaintiff has been damaged
emotionally and financially, including but not limited to emotional suffering from
emotional distress and ridicule, as well as loss of income and earnings potential.
Plaintiff has also been damaged physically as a result of the retaliatory actions of
Defendants’ employees, which exacerbated Plaintiff’s Multiple Sclerosis.
Case 8:15-cv-01260 Document 1 Filed 08/06/15 Page 17 of 27 Page ID #:17
- 18 -
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
GE
RA
GO
S &
GE
RA
GO
S, A
PC
H
IST
OR
IC E
NG
INE
CO
. NO
. 28
6
44
So
uth
Fig
ue
ro
a S
tre
et
Lo
s A
ng
ele
s, C
al
ifo
rn
ia 9
00
17
-34
11
84. In engaging in the conduct as hereinabove alleged, Defendants and their
agents, servants, employees, and authorized representatives acted with malice, fraud,
and oppression and/or in conscious disregard of Plaintiff’s health, rights, and well-
being, and intended to subject Plaintiff to unjust hardship, thereby warranting an
assessment of punitive damages in an amount sufficient to punish Defendants and
deter others from engaging in similar conduct.
SIXTH CAUSE OF ACTION
HARASSMENT IN VIOLATION OF GOVERNMENT CODE §12940
(Plaintiff Against All Defendants)
85. Plaintiff realleges and incorporates as if fully stated herein each and
every allegation contained above and incorporates the same herein by this reference as
though set forth in full.
86. By engaging in the conduct previously alleged herein, Defendants
violated Government Code section 12940 by creating, maintaining, encouraging,
failing to investigate properly, and by failing to remedy a hostile work environment
prohibited by the Fair Employment and Housing Act, despite Plaintiff’s complaints to
management-level employees of harassment and discrimination.
87. Plaintiff is informed and believes and thereon alleges that the working
conditions at Defendants were both subjectively and objectively pervasive as to
constitute a prima facie case of harassment under state and federal laws.
88. The harassment endured by Plaintiff was made known to Defendants’
management-level employees. Defendants’ management failed to discipline,
admonish, or timely investigate Plaintiff’s claims. Instead of prompt investigation or
resolution of the hostile environment, Defendants, through their management-level
employees and agents, chose to engage in a campaign of intimidation, harassment and
abuse as alleged above.
89. At all relevant times, Defendants had actual and constructive knowledge
of the hostile work environment described and alleged herein, and condoned, ratified,
Case 8:15-cv-01260 Document 1 Filed 08/06/15 Page 18 of 27 Page ID #:18
- 19 -
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
GE
RA
GO
S &
GE
RA
GO
S, A
PC
H
IST
OR
IC E
NG
INE
CO
. NO
. 28
6
44
So
uth
Fig
ue
ro
a S
tre
et
Lo
s A
ng
ele
s, C
al
ifo
rn
ia 9
00
17
-34
11
and failed to remedy the hostile work environment.
90. Defendants ratified their agents, servants, employees, and authorized
representatives’ unlawful conduct and behavior as described herein by: (1) allowing
the pervasive fraudulent activity to occur without rectifying it despite attempts by
Plaintiff to bring the conduct to Defendants’ attention; (2) condoning the pervasive
fraudulent activities; and (3) condoning the retaliatory measures taken against Plaintiff
by failing to intervene and halt the behavior and actions of Defendants’ employees.
91. As a direct and proximate cause of the tortious, unlawful, and wrongful
acts of Defendants and their respective agents, servants, employees, and authorized
representatives as aforesaid, Plaintiff has suffered past and future special damages,
including impairment of reputation and personal humiliation, and past and future
general damages in an amount according to proof at trial. Plaintiff has been damaged
emotionally and financially, including but not limited to emotional suffering from
emotional distress and ridicule, as well as loss of income and earnings potential.
Plaintiff has also been damaged physically as a result of the retaliatory actions of
Defendants’ employees, which exacerbated Plaintiff’s Multiple Sclerosis.
92. In engaging in the conduct as hereinabove alleged, Defendants and their
agents, servants, employees, and authorized representatives acted with malice, fraud,
and oppression and/or in conscious disregard of Plaintiff’s health, rights, and well-
being, and intended to subject Plaintiff to unjust hardship, thereby warranting an
assessment of punitive damages in an amount sufficient to punish Defendants and
deter others from engaging in similar conduct.
SEVENTH CAUSE OF ACTION
RETALIATION IN VIOLATION OF GOVERNMENT CODE §12940
(Plaintiff Against All Defendants)
93. Plaintiff realleges and incorporates as if fully stated herein each and
every allegation contained above and incorporates the same herein by this reference as
though set forth in full.
Case 8:15-cv-01260 Document 1 Filed 08/06/15 Page 19 of 27 Page ID #:19
- 20 -
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
GE
RA
GO
S &
GE
RA
GO
S, A
PC
H
IST
OR
IC E
NG
INE
CO
. NO
. 28
6
44
So
uth
Fig
ue
ro
a S
tre
et
Lo
s A
ng
ele
s, C
al
ifo
rn
ia 9
00
17
-34
11
94. Under Government Code section 12940, Defendants are prohibited from
retaliation against Plaintiff for opposing any practices forbidden or made unlawful
under Government Code section 12940.
95. Plaintiff complained to Defendants’ as alleged herein that Plaintiff was
being harassed and retaliated against on account of his disability.
96. Plaintiff is informed and believes and thereon alleges that Defendants had
numerous opportunities to remedy the hostility of their workplace, but Defendants,
through their employees and agents, chose to engage in a campaign of intimidation,
harassment and abuse as alleged above.
97. Plaintiff is informed and believes and thereon alleges that after Plaintiff
complained about the fraudulent conduct and disability discrimination as alleged
herein, Defendants’ managers engaged in tactics to intimidate and harass Plaintiff.
Specifically, Plaintiff was micro-managed and given assignments with impossible
deadlines. Plaintiff suffered emotional distress, further physical injuries, and was
eventually either directly terminated or constructively terminated in retaliation for
requesting basic accommodations for his Multiple Sclerosis.
98. At all relevant times, Defendants had actual and constructive knowledge
of the retaliatory conduct described and alleged herein, and condoned, ratified and
participated in the retaliation. As a result of the retaliatory behavior perpetrated and
executed by Defendants, and Defendants’ failure to protect Plaintiff from retaliatory
behavior, Plaintiff has suffered severe emotional distress, humiliation, embarrassment,
and physical injuries. As a further proximate result of such conduct, Plaintiff has
suffered loss of income, loss of career opportunity and loss of tangible job benefits, all
in amounts to be proven at trial.
99. Defendants ratified their agents, servants, employees, and authorized
representatives’ unlawful conduct and behavior as described herein by: (1) allowing
the pervasive fraudulent activity to occur without rectifying it despite attempts by
Plaintiff to bring the conduct to Defendants’ attention; (2) condoning the pervasive
Case 8:15-cv-01260 Document 1 Filed 08/06/15 Page 20 of 27 Page ID #:20
- 21 -
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
GE
RA
GO
S &
GE
RA
GO
S, A
PC
H
IST
OR
IC E
NG
INE
CO
. NO
. 28
6
44
So
uth
Fig
ue
ro
a S
tre
et
Lo
s A
ng
ele
s, C
al
ifo
rn
ia 9
00
17
-34
11
fraudulent activities; and (3) condoning the retaliatory measures taken against Plaintiff
by failing to intervene and halt the behavior and actions of Defendants’ employees.
100. As a direct and proximate cause of the tortious, unlawful, and wrongful
acts of Defendants and their respective agents, servants, employees, and authorized
representatives as aforesaid, Plaintiff has suffered past and future special damages,
including impairment of reputation and personal humiliation, and past and future
general damages in an amount according to proof at trial. Plaintiff has been damaged
emotionally and financially, including but not limited to emotional suffering from
emotional distress and ridicule, as well as loss of income and earnings potential.
Plaintiff has also been damaged physically as a result of the retaliatory actions of
Defendants’ employees, which exacerbated Plaintiff’s Multiple Sclerosis.
101. In engaging in the conduct as hereinabove alleged, Defendants and their
agents, servants, employees, and authorized representatives acted with malice, fraud,
and oppression and/or in conscious disregard of Plaintiff’s health, rights, and well-
being, and intended to subject Plaintiff to unjust hardship, thereby warranting an
assessment of punitive damages in an amount sufficient to punish Defendants and
deter others from engaging in similar conduct.
EIGHTH CAUSE OF ACTION
FAILURE TO MAINTAIN ENVIRONMENT FREE FROM HARASSMENT IN
VIOLATION OF GOVERNMENT CODE § 12940
(Plaintiff Against All Defendants)
102. Plaintiff realleges and incorporates as if fully stated herein each and
every allegation contained above and incorporates the same herein by this reference as
though set forth in full.
103. Defendants failed to take all reasonable steps to prevent harassment
against Plaintiff from occurring, and to take immediate and appropriate corrective
action to remedy the harassment, in violation of Government Code section 12940, by
engaging in the course of conduct set forth above, among other things.
Case 8:15-cv-01260 Document 1 Filed 08/06/15 Page 21 of 27 Page ID #:21
- 22 -
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
GE
RA
GO
S &
GE
RA
GO
S, A
PC
H
IST
OR
IC E
NG
INE
CO
. NO
. 28
6
44
So
uth
Fig
ue
ro
a S
tre
et
Lo
s A
ng
ele
s, C
al
ifo
rn
ia 9
00
17
-34
11
104. Specifically, Defendants failed and have failed to the present time to take
any disciplinary action against Jacob Alao, among other individuals, who are
responsible for creating the discriminatory and harassing conduct directed at Plaintiff.
Additionally, upon information and belief, Defendants have failed to discipline their
human resources department for terminating Plaintiff after he requested
accommodations for his Multiple Sclerosis.
105. At all relevant times, Defendants had actual and constructive knowledge
of the retaliatory conduct described and alleged herein, and condoned, ratified, and
participated in the retaliation. As a result of the retaliatory behavior perpetrated and
executed by Defendants, and Defendants’ failure to protect Plaintiff from retaliatory
behavior, Plaintiff has suffered severe emotional distress, humiliation, embarrassment,
and physical injuries. As a further proximate result of such conduct, Plaintiff has
suffered loss of income, loss of career opportunity and loss of tangible job benefits, all
in amounts to be proven at trial.
106. Defendants ratified their agents, servants, employees, and authorized
representatives’ unlawful conduct and behavior as described herein by: (1) allowing
the pervasive fraudulent activity to occur without rectifying it despite attempts by
Plaintiff to bring the conduct to Defendants’ attention; (2) condoning the pervasive
fraudulent activities; and (3) condoning the retaliatory measures taken against Plaintiff
by failing to intervene and halt the behavior and actions of Defendants’ employees.
107. As a direct and proximate cause of the tortious, unlawful, and wrongful
acts of Defendants and their respective agents, servants, employees, and authorized
representatives as aforesaid, Plaintiff has suffered past and future special damages,
including impairment of reputation and personal humiliation, and past and future
general damages in an amount according to proof at trial. Plaintiff has been damaged
emotionally and financially, including but not limited to emotional suffering from
emotional distress and ridicule, as well as loss of income and earnings potential.
Plaintiff has also been damaged physically as a result of the retaliatory actions of
Case 8:15-cv-01260 Document 1 Filed 08/06/15 Page 22 of 27 Page ID #:22
- 23 -
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
GE
RA
GO
S &
GE
RA
GO
S, A
PC
H
IST
OR
IC E
NG
INE
CO
. NO
. 28
6
44
So
uth
Fig
ue
ro
a S
tre
et
Lo
s A
ng
ele
s, C
al
ifo
rn
ia 9
00
17
-34
11
Defendants’ employees, which exacerbated Plaintiff’s Multiple Sclerosis.
108. In engaging in the conduct as hereinabove alleged, Defendants and their
agents, servants, employees, and authorized representatives acted with malice, fraud,
and oppression and/or in conscious disregard of Plaintiff’s health, rights, and well-
being, and intended to subject Plaintiff to unjust hardship, thereby warranting an
assessment of punitive damages in an amount sufficient to punish Defendants and
deter others from engaging in similar conduct.
NINTH CAUSE OF ACTION
INTENTIONAL INFLICTION OF EMOTIONAL DISTRESS
(Plaintiff Against All Defendants)
109. Plaintiff realleges and incorporates as if fully stated herein each and
every allegation contained above and incorporates the same herein by this reference as
though set forth in full.
110. Defendants’ conduct, as described above, was extreme and outrageous
and beyond the bounds of decency tolerated in a civilized society.
111. Defendants’ conduct was intended to cause Plaintiff emotional distress
and Defendant acted with a reckless disregard to the probability that Plaintiff would
suffer emotional distress.
112. Plaintiff suffered severe emotional distress as a result of the conduct by
Defendants’ managers, which was made in response to Plaintiff raising complaints
regarding ongoing pervasive fraudulent conduct as well as his Multiple Sclerosis.
113. As a result of the conduct alleged above, Plaintiff suffered and continues
to suffer severe emotional distress which has resulted in physical manifestations of
such distress. Specifically, Plaintiff suffers from debilitating depression, exhaustion,
and deteriorating health.
114. Defendants and Defendants’ conduct were a substantial factor in causing
Plaintiff’s severe emotional distress.
115. Defendants ratified their agents, servants, employees, and authorized
Case 8:15-cv-01260 Document 1 Filed 08/06/15 Page 23 of 27 Page ID #:23
- 24 -
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
GE
RA
GO
S &
GE
RA
GO
S, A
PC
H
IST
OR
IC E
NG
INE
CO
. NO
. 28
6
44
So
uth
Fig
ue
ro
a S
tre
et
Lo
s A
ng
ele
s, C
al
ifo
rn
ia 9
00
17
-34
11
representatives’ unlawful conduct and behavior as described herein by: (1) allowing
the pervasive fraudulent activity to occur without rectifying it despite attempts by
Plaintiff to bring the conduct to Defendants’ attention; (2) condoning the pervasive
fraudulent activities; and (3) condoning the retaliatory measures taken against Plaintiff
by failing to intervene and halt the behavior and actions of Defendants’ employees.
116. As a direct and proximate cause of the tortious, unlawful, and wrongful
acts of Defendants and their respective agents, servants, employees, and authorized
representatives as aforesaid, Plaintiff has suffered past and future special damages,
including impairment of reputation and personal humiliation, and past and future
general damages in an amount according to proof at trial. Plaintiff has been damaged
emotionally and financially, including but not limited to emotional suffering from
emotional distress and ridicule, as well as loss of income and earnings potential.
Plaintiff has also been damaged physically as a result of the retaliatory actions of
Defendants’ employees, which exacerbated Plaintiff’s Multiple Sclerosis.
117. In engaging in the conduct as hereinabove alleged, Defendants and their
agents, servants, employees, and authorized representatives acted with malice, fraud,
and oppression and/or in conscious disregard of Plaintiff’s health, rights, and well-
being, and intended to subject Plaintiff to unjust hardship, thereby warranting an
assessment of punitive damages in an amount sufficient to punish Defendants and
deter others from engaging in similar conduct.
TENTH CAUSE OF ACTION
NEGLIGENT INFLICTION OF EMOTIONAL DISTRESS
(Plaintiff Against All Defendants)
118. Plaintiff realleges and incorporates as if fully stated herein each and
every allegation contained above and incorporates the same herein by this reference as
though set forth in full.
119. Defendant owed a duty to use reasonable care in its conduct with regard
to the health, safety, and rights of Plaintiff. It was foreseeable and probable that
Case 8:15-cv-01260 Document 1 Filed 08/06/15 Page 24 of 27 Page ID #:24
- 25 -
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
GE
RA
GO
S &
GE
RA
GO
S, A
PC
H
IST
OR
IC E
NG
INE
CO
. NO
. 28
6
44
So
uth
Fig
ue
ro
a S
tre
et
Lo
s A
ng
ele
s, C
al
ifo
rn
ia 9
00
17
-34
11
Plaintiff would suffer severe emotional distress from Defendants’ conduct.
120. Defendants were negligent by breaching the duty of care they owed to
Plaintiff when Defendants’ agents, employees, and representatives repeatedly
harassed, reprimanded, discouraged, and intimidated Plaintiff, and Defendants were
aware of such conduct by their agents, employees, and representatives and allowed it
to continue.
121. Plaintiff suffered severe emotional distress as a result of the conduct by
Defendants’ managers, which was made in response to Plaintiff raising complaints
regarding ongoing pervasive fraudulent conduct as well as his Multiple Sclerosis.
122. As a result of the conduct alleged above, Plaintiff suffered and continues
to suffer severe emotional distress which has resulted in physical manifestations of
such distress. Specifically, Plaintiff suffers from debilitating depression, exhaustion,
and deteriorating health.
123. Defendants were a substantial factor in causing Plaintiff’s severe
emotional distress.
124. Defendants ratified their agents, servants, employees, and authorized
representatives’ unlawful conduct and behavior as described herein by: (1) allowing
the pervasive fraudulent activity to occur without rectifying it despite attempts by
Plaintiff to bring the conduct to Defendants’ attention; (2) condoning the pervasive
fraudulent activities; and (3) condoning the retaliatory measures taken against Plaintiff
by failing to intervene and halt the behavior and actions of Defendants’ employees.
125. As a direct and proximate cause of the tortious, unlawful, and wrongful
acts of Defendants and their respective agents, servants, employees, and authorized
representatives as aforesaid, Plaintiff has suffered past and future special damages,
including impairment of reputation and personal humiliation, and past and future
general damages in an amount according to proof at trial. Plaintiff has been damaged
emotionally and financially, including but not limited to emotional suffering from
emotional distress and ridicule, as well as loss of income and earnings potential.
Case 8:15-cv-01260 Document 1 Filed 08/06/15 Page 25 of 27 Page ID #:25
- 26 -
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
GE
RA
GO
S &
GE
RA
GO
S, A
PC
H
IST
OR
IC E
NG
INE
CO
. NO
. 28
6
44
So
uth
Fig
ue
ro
a S
tre
et
Lo
s A
ng
ele
s, C
al
ifo
rn
ia 9
00
17
-34
11
Plaintiff has also been damaged physically as a result of the retaliatory actions of
Defendants’ employees, which exacerbated Plaintiff’s Multiple Sclerosis.
126. In engaging in the conduct as hereinabove alleged, Defendants and their
agents, servants, employees, and authorized representatives acted with malice, fraud,
and oppression and/or in conscious disregard of Plaintiff’s health, rights, and well-
being, and intended to subject Plaintiff to unjust hardship, thereby warranting an
assessment of punitive damages in an amount sufficient to punish Defendants and
deter others from engaging in similar conduct.
PRAYER FOR RELIEF
WHEREFORE, Plaintiff Joseph Weinberg respectfully requests for judgment to
be entered upon Defendants Valeant Pharmaceuticals International, Medicis
Pharmaceutical Corporation, Obagi Medical Products, Inc. and Bausch & Lomb
Incorporated as follows:
1. For general and special damages for an amount to be determined at trial;
2. For pre- and post-judgment interest according to proof;
3. For Punitive Damages where applicable;
4. For Attorney Fees where applicable;
3. For costs of suit incurred herein; and
4. For all other relief as this court may deem proper.
DATED: August 6, 2015 GERAGOS & GERAGOS, APC
By: /s/ MARK J. GERAGOS MARK J. GERAGOS BEN J. MEISELAS TYLER M. ROSS Attorneys for Plaintiff JOSEPH WEINBERG
Case 8:15-cv-01260 Document 1 Filed 08/06/15 Page 26 of 27 Page ID #:26
- 27 -
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
GE
RA
GO
S &
GE
RA
GO
S, A
PC
H
IST
OR
IC E
NG
INE
CO
. NO
. 28
6
44
So
uth
Fig
ue
ro
a S
tre
et
Lo
s A
ng
ele
s, C
al
ifo
rn
ia 9
00
17
-34
11
DEMAND FOR JURY TRIAL
Plaintiff Joseph Weinberg hereby demands a jury trial.
DATED: August 6, 2015 GERAGOS & GERAGOS, APC
By: /s/ MARK J. GERAGOS MARK J. GERAGOS BEN J. MEISELAS TYLER M. ROSS Attorneys for Plaintiff JOSEPH WEINBERG
Case 8:15-cv-01260 Document 1 Filed 08/06/15 Page 27 of 27 Page ID #:27