Hamza v. United Continental Holdings, LLC

• Decision Date: 29 July 2021
• Docket Number: Civ. Action 19-8971 (FLW)
• Parties: AMIR M. HAMZA, Plaintiff, v. UNITED CONTINENTAL HOLDINGS, LLC, et al., Defendants.
• Court: U.S. District Court — District of New Jersey

AMIR M. HAMZA, Plaintiff, v. UNITED CONTINENTAL HOLDINGS, LLC, et al., Defendants.

Civ. Action No. 19-8971 (FLW)

United States District Court, D. New Jersey

July 29, 2021

NOT FOR PUBLICATION

OPINION

Hon Freda L. Wolfson, U.S. Chief District Judge.

Plaintiff Amir M. Hamza ("Plaintiff), proceeding pro se, has filed a Second Amended Complaint ("SAC") against Defendant United Airlines, Inc. ("Defendant" or "United"), ^[1] bringing various claims related to his termination from employment with Defendant. Presently before the Court is Defendant's Motion to Dismiss the Second Amended Complaint pursuant to Federal Rules of Civil Procedure 12(b)(1) and 12(b)(6). For the reasons set forth below, Defendant's Motion is DENIED in part and GRANTED in part. Defendant's Motion is denied with respect to Plaintiffs claims for retaliation and discriminatory termination under the ADA. Defendant's Motion is granted with prejudice with respect to every other claim except for Plaintiffs claim under the Family and Medical Leave Act ("FMLA"), which is dismissed without prejudice. Plaintiff is given leave to amend his complaint within 30 days of the Order accompanying this Opinion in order to allege facts demonstrating that he was eligible for FMLA benefits and that are otherwise sufficient to state a claim for FMLA interference.

I. BACKGROUND AND PROCEDURAL HISTORY

The relevant facts are derived from Plaintiffs SAC and assumed as true for the purposes of this motion.

Plaintiff was employed as a Flight Attendant with United from September 2011 through his termination on December 5, 2018. On April 14, 2018, Plaintiff alleges that he "was the victim of a sexual assault while on a layover at Washington-Dulles International Airport" ("Dulles Airport"). ECF No. 40 ¶1. The perpetrator is allegedly also employed as a Flight Attendant with United. Id.^[2] Following the assault, Plaintiff alleges that he arrived for a flight leaving Dulles Airport "in dire medical and psychological condition." Id. ¶2. The captain of the flight observed that "Plaintiff was 'acting belligerent, his eyes were unfocused, he was jittery, he was rambling and he was having difficulty staying awake.'" Id. ¶7. For that reason, the captain notified a United Inflight Supervisor, Alex Barreto ("Barreto"), as to Plaintiffs condition. Id. ¶8. According Barreto, who reported to Plaintiffs gate and observed Plaintiff at Dulles Airport the night of April 14, 2018, "Plaintiff was 'disoriented and sweating profusely. He looked pale and his speech was slurred and forced. He could barely keep his eyes open. . . . His thought process was not focused and his conversations were all over the place." Id. ¶4.^[3] Barreto escorted Plaintiff to the Inflight Office in order to examine Plaintiffs condition, where he was joined by another United employee, Sandra Sales ("Sales"). Plaintiff alleges that neither Barreto nor Sales contacted emergency medical services.

Barreto and Sales called for a "test facilitator" to test Plaintiff for substances at the airport. Id. ¶8. The test facilitator allegedly arrived at 1:50 AM on April 15, 2018, which was over four hours after Plaintiff arrived at the airport for his flight. Id. ¶9. Plaintiff does not state definitively whether he had taken any substances that are controlled under United's Substance Abuse Policy, and he does not include the results of the test administered on April 15, 2018. He also alleges that he did not receive "any documentation related to the . . . 'alleged substance' in the test sample" and that he "did not voluntarily consume any substance which violates Defendant's Substance Abuse Policy." Id. ¶¶191-99. However Plaintiff also explains that United maintains an "Employee Assistance Program [("EAP")]," and that, "[i]n this case, a flight attendant who tests positive for questionable substances would be required to communicate with the EAP coordinator to determine what course of action must be taken for the employee to return to a safety related position." Id. ¶85.

Following the alleged sexual assault on April 14, 2018, "Plaintiff was unable to return to work," through his termination in December 2018, "due to the psychological disorders he suffered" as a result of the incident. Id. ¶11. During this period, Plaintiff allegedly "substantiated his absence from work," as required under the Collective Bargaining Agreement ("CBA") between United and its flight attendants, "by providing medical notes from" Marcelo Abramovich ("Abramovich"), a Licensed Clinical Social Worker (LCSW), who saw Plaintiff intermittently during his absence from work. Id. ¶¶10-11. According to Plaintiffs allegations, "[c]ontinued observation by [Abramovich] revealed Plaintiff suffered from manic depression, trust issues, anxiety, paranoia, panic attacks insomnia followed by extreme exhaustion, sleep deprivation, and other psychological disorders." Id. ¶10.

During Plaintiff s absence, he went through a process with Defendant in an attempt to secure medical leave. Plaintiff alleges that United employees Mark Di Carlo ("Di Carlo") and Mary Sturchio ("Sturchio"), who were overseeing Plaintiffs absence and interacted with Plaintiff regarding his leave application, "made it extremely difficult for Plaintiff to take the time he needed to recover." Id. ¶11. Di Carlo requested that Plaintiff provide a police report associated with the alleged sexual assault. Plaintiff alleges that he attempted to file a police report by phone with the Fairfax County Police Department in Virginia (the "Department") a month after the incident, but that the Department required such reports to be submitted in person. Id. ¶20. Plaintiff allegedly drove to Fairfax County and filed a report in person, but the Department was unable to provide a report identification number until after the investigation was complete. Id. ¶113. Plaintiff alleges that, before Di Carlo took over Plaintiffs case, Plaintiff informed United Inflight Supervisor Navi Johal ("Johal") that he filed the report and that Detective Cheetham from the Department (the "Detective"), who was assigned to investigate the alleged assault, would contact Johal. On July 23, 2018, Di Carlo took over United's oversight of Plaintiff s absence from Johal, id. ¶l 15, and it is not clear from Plaintiffs allegations whether he ever provided evidence of the police report to Johal or Di Carlo.

Plaintiff also alleges that "Di Carlo falsified information to Detective Cheetham" when the Detective contacted Di Carlo regarding Plaintiffs sexual assault allegations. Id. ¶13. Specifically, Plaintiff alleges that-according to the Detective-Di Carlo told the Detective that Plaintiff "was enrolled in a 'Substance Abuse Program.'" Id. ¶84. Plaintiff alleges that Defendant does not maintain a "Substance Abuse Program," but rather provides employees with an EAP "to assist them in a variety of different matters," including, "[i]n this case," determining "what course of action must be taken for [an] employee to return to a safety related position" after the employee tests positive "for questionable substances." Id. ¶85.

Plaintiff further alleges that Di Carlo requested documentation of the medical conditions that necessitated Plaintiffs absence. E.g., Id. ¶¶219-20. Plaintiff alleges that he provided notes from Abramovich discussing Plaintiffs conditions and treatment sessions. Id. ¶11. Di Carlo allegedly stated that the notes were "being 'reviewed'" but "never provided a response to whether there were any issues with the letter," and instead "sent a FedEx letter stating the Plaintiff needed to provide documentation but didn't explain what happened to the documentation [Plaintiff] provided earlier." Id. ¶220. Plaintiff does not elaborate on the "documentation" Di Carlo requested, but he notes that Di Carlo sent Plaintiff multiple letters requesting documentation during this period. Id. Plaintiff further alleges that "[b]etween July 24, 2018," when Di Carlo took over his case for United, "and November 13, 2018, . . . [Di Carlo and Sturchio] failed to inform Plaintiff that [Abramovich] wouldn't qualify to complete" the documentation necessary to grant Plaintiff medical leave. Id. ¶I76. Ultimately, Plaintiff alleges that he "became extremely agitated by the letter," that "[t]he list of documents requested became daunting," and that "[he] couldn't manage to figure out how to attend to each demand." Id. ¶221.

Plaintiff was ultimately terminated on December 5, 2018. According to the SAC, Defendant terminated Plaintiff "because they weren't satisfied with the medical information [Plaintiff] provided." Id. ¶224.

Plaintiff filed his initial Complaint in this matter on March 26, 2019. ECF No. 1. On October 25, 2019, Defendant filed a Motion for More Definite Statement and Motion to Dismiss. ECF No. 15. On December 30, 2019, the Court granted Defendant's Motion for More Definite Statement but denied the Motion to Dismiss without prejudice and ordered Plaintiff to file an amended complaint, ECF No. 18, which Plaintiff timely filed on January 28, 2020. ECF No. 19. Plaintiffs First Amended Complaint ("FAC") asserted claims for negligence breach of contract, wrongful termination, intentional infliction of emotional distress, and delay in investigation. Defendant filed a Motion to Dismiss the FAC on February 12, 2020, ECF No. 20, and in his Opposition, Plaintiff asserted eight new causes of action, as well as new factual allegations, none of which were set forth in the FAC. ECF No. 22.^[4] This Court issued an Opinion and Order resolving Defendant's Motion to Dismiss on September 28, 2020, in which the Court dismissed Plaintiffs negligence and delay in investigation claims with prejudice, dismissed the remaining claims without prejudice, and granted Plaintiff leave to amend his...