Bozgoz v. James
| Decision Date | 14 August 2020 |
| Docket Number | Civil Action No. 19-0239 (ABJ) |
| Parties | MARGARET BOZGOZ, et al., Plaintiffs, v. VONCELLE JAMES, Supervisory Management Analyst, VBAOCR, et al., Defendants. |
| Court | U.S. District Court — District of Columbia |
Plaintiffs Margaret and Robert Bozgoz, proceeding pro se, have brought this lawsuit alleging various torts and violations of federal statutes against twenty-nine defendants, twenty-eight of whom are federal employees, and the majority of those worked at the Department of Veterans Affairs ("VA"). See Fourth Am. Compl. [Dkt. # 41]; Order [Dkt. # 45] ("Order Severing Case"). Mr. Bozgoz is a former employee of the VA, and he claims that he was denied reasonable accommodations and discriminated against when a request for overtime was denied in January of 2018 and during the events that ensued thereafter. See generally Fourth Am. Compl. Mrs. Bozgoz acts as her husband's "Americans with Disabilities Act Representative," and in that role, she has pursued administrative relief on Mr. Bozgoz's behalf. Id. ¶ 4.
The purpose of this opinion is to address the pending motions to dismiss, and the Court thinks it is important to announce at the start that the lawsuit will go forward: plaintiffs' employment discrimination claims under Title VII, the Age Discrimination in Employment Act, and the Rehabilitation Act will not be dismissed.
Defendants moved to dismiss all of plaintiffs' claims, except for the Title VII claims. Defs.' Mot. to Dismiss [Dkt. # 52] ( ). Defendant Judge Del Toro filed a separate motion to dismiss the claims against her on the basis of judicial immunity, among other reasons. Def. Del Toro's Mot. to Dismiss [Dkt. # 57] ("Del Toro's Mot."). Plaintiffs have opposed both motions. Pls.' Opp. to Defs.' Mot. [Dkt. # 60] ( ); Pls' Opp. to Del Toro's Mot. [Dkt. # 64].1
For the following reasons, the Court will grant in part and deny in part defendants' partial motion to dismiss, and it will grant defendant Judge Del Toro's motion to dismiss.
The complaint is quite long and it takes issue with a large number of people and events, but the Court will endeavor to summarize the key allegations here. Robert Bozgoz (hereinafter "Mr. Bozgoz") is a "service-disabled Veteran and former employee of the VA." Fourth Am. Compl. ¶ 1. He alleges that sometime in January of 2018, he asked to work overtime on the Martin Luther King, Jr. holiday, and his request was denied. See id. ¶ 2. Plaintiffs allege that Voncelle James, the Supervisory Program Analyst at the Veterans Benefits Administration ("VBA"), denied Mr. Bozgoz's overtime request on the basis of his race. Id. ¶¶ 2-3. Mr. Bozgoz is a white man, and his supervisor is African American. Id.
Angela Kendrix, the Deputy Director of the VBA, scheduled a meeting with Mr. Bozgoz and his supervisor James to discuss the claim of racial discrimination. Fourth Am. Compl. ¶ 3. Plaintiff Margaret Sue Bozgoz (hereinafter "Mrs. Bozgoz") asserts that she is Mr. Bozgoz's "[r]epresentative" under the Americans with Disabilities Act ("ADA"), and she complains that she was not allowed to participate at the meeting despite her status.2 Id. On January 18, 2018, Mrs. Bozgoz filed a complaint with the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission ("EEOC") on behalf of her husband. Id. ¶¶ 5-6; id. at 221. That day, Mr. Bozgoz sent a message to Kevin Brown, the "Reasonable Accommodations Coordinator" of the VBA, id. at 15, stating that he intends to file an EEO Complaint and that "[h]e would like to update his 2016 [reasonable accommodation]." Id. ¶ 5.3
According to the complaint, the agency conducted an internal investigation into the events of January 11-12, 2018. Fourth Am. Compl. ¶ 8. Plaintiffs allege that the investigation was initiated in retaliation for raising the discrimination claims, and that the investigation triggered a series of events in which the employees of the VA engaged in a conspiracy to deprive them of their rights by, among other things, purposefully ignoring emails and phone calls, asking for medical documents when they were not entitled to them, and denying Mr. Bozgoz reasonable accommodations. Id. ¶¶ 7-36. On January 31, 2018, according to the plaintiffs, the VA department employees "conspire[d]" and issued Mr. Bozgoz a letter of reprimand. Id. ¶ 16. Plaintiffs also allege that during this time, defendants forged a number of documents and "designed" claims against them. Id. ¶¶ 15-25.
On February 9, 2018, the internal fact-finding report was completed, and a copy was provided to Mr. Bozgoz's supervisors. Fourth Am. Compl. ¶ 19. Over the next few days, plaintiffs allege, agency personnel "coordinate[d]" and "designed" Mr. Bozgoz's EEO claims. Id. ¶¶ 20- 22. On February 13, 2018, Mr. Bozgoz offered to participate in mediation with the agency, id. ¶ 26, but plaintiffs allege that the agency was not interested in mediation. Id. ¶ 27. At some point, Mrs. Bozgoz requested that Mr. Bozgoz be transferred to Georgia as a reasonable accommodation, but the request was refused. Id. ¶¶ 31-32. Plaintiffs mention "2016 Reasonable Accommodations" which are not further described, and they state that those were also denied. Id. ¶¶ 32-40. Mr. Bozgoz also allegedly requested two weeks of leave on February 24, 2018, but the request was ignored, and he repeats in connection with this allegation that reasonable accommodations were "delayed/denied." Id. ¶ 45.
Throughout the spring, the couple attempted to update the EEO complaint, although they contend that the claims were never properly amended. See Fourth Am. Compl. ¶¶ 46-53, 72, 74, 76, 81, 83-85, 92, 106. For example, on February 25, 2018, Mrs. Bozgoz submitted twenty-one additional claims on Mr. Bozgoz's behalf to the Office of Resolution Management ("ORM") of the VA. Id. ¶ 46. Plaintiffs allege that the claims were never added to Mr. Bozgoz's file. Id. ¶¶ 46-53, 74. On or about March 30, 2018, EEO counselor Angela Myers "submit[ted] 9 claims" to Mrs. Bozgoz, but plaintiffs allege that the claims were incorrect and did not reflect the EEO complaint accurately. Id. ¶ 72; see id. ¶ 106 ().4
At some point in March or April of 2018, mediation was scheduled, Fourth Am. Compl. ¶ 77, although it was later canceled. Id. The complaint alleges that the pattern of unlawful conduct continued for the next few months: their grievances were not recorded or heard, and all of this was being done to discriminate and retaliate against Mr. Bozgoz on account of his disability, race, or age. See id. ¶¶ 56-98. Plaintiffs claim that on April 24, 2018, an "ineffective" reasonable accommodation was approved for Mr. Bozgoz. Id. ¶ 82; see id. ¶ 89. In mid-May, Mr. Bozgoz asked for administrative leave so that he could pursue his EEO claims against the agency, but that request was denied. Id. ¶¶ 99-100.
Sometime that spring, the VA hired a third-party, Dr. Anne Klein, to investigate plaintiffs' claims. See, e.g., Fourth Am. Compl. ¶¶ 102, 106.
The alleged harassment continued through the summer of 2018: plaintiffs claim that they continued to be subjected to "fraud, waste and abuse" on the part of the VA through the agency's investigation and the administrative process. Fourth Am. Compl. ¶¶ 100-112. Additional reasonable accommodations, such as teleworking or a transfer, were requested but they were denied. Id. ¶¶ 120, 123-124, 126-27, 146, 149-50. Plaintiffs also state that Mr. Bozgoz requested sick leave and administrative leave but the requests were denied. Id. ¶¶ 112, 155, 157.5 In August of 2018, the agency proposed suspending Mr. Bozgoz. Id. ¶ 154. Later that month, on August 14, 2018, Mr. Bozgoz suffered a stroke, and plaintiffs allege that they asked for 240 hours of "emergency leave," and that request was also denied. Id. ¶ 161. They also allege that they requested several Occupational Safety and Hazards Act inspections, which were denied. Id. ¶¶ 164, 168. Mr. Bozgoz served his suspension in September 2018. Id. ¶ 176.
At the end of August 2018, plaintiffs' claims reached an EEOC Administrative Law Judge. Fourth Am. Compl. ¶ 173. Plaintiffs allege that various VA employees submitted false documents to the judge, id. ¶¶ 184-86, 190-93, and that the judge mishandled the case. Id. ¶¶ 182, 190-91. On November 29, 2018, the Administrative Law Judge issued an order of dismissal. Id. ¶ 204.
This action was initiated on January 29, 2019. Compl. [Dkt. # 1]. Margaret Bozgoz and her son, Austin Bozgoz, filed a complaint supported by over three hundred pages of exhibits against forty-two defendants, most of whom were employees of the Department of Veterans Affairs. The allegations included violations of the Rehabilitation Act, the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act, the Occupational Safety and Health Act, and the Americans with Disabilities Act, among others. See Compl. [Dkt. # 1]. The claims centered around the discrimination and retaliation allegedly visited upon Robert Bozgoz, the federal employee in the family, but Mr. Bozgoz was not named as a plaintiff in the case.
The Court issued an order requiring plaintiffs to show cause why they had standing to pursue claims on behalf of their family member. Order [Dkt. # 3]. On February 14, 2019, plaintiffs filed an amended complaint, but the standing issue still remained, and the Court issued a Minute Order modifying the Order to Show Cause to refer to the claims in the Amended Complaint. Am. Compl. [Dkt. # 4]; Min. Order (Feb. 15, 2019). In an apparent response to all of this, Robert Bozgoz moved to intervene in the case on March 7, 2019. Mot. to Intervene [Dkt. # 5]. The Court granted the motion and dismissed Austin Bozgoz from the case, because the plaintiffs' son had not asserted any claims on his own behalf. Order [Dkt. # 7]. Because the complaint did include claims alleging discrimination and retaliation on behalf of ...
To continue reading
Request your trial