Mesbah v. Univ. of Louisville

• Docket Number: Civil Action 3:22-CV-567-CHB
• Decision Date: 15 September 2023
• Parties: SAMINEH MESBAH, Plaintiff, v. UNIVERSITY OF LOUISVILLE, Defendant.
• Court: U.S. District Court — Western District of Kentucky

1

SAMINEH MESBAH, Plaintiff,
v.
UNIVERSITY OF LOUISVILLE, Defendant.

Civil Action No. 3:22-CV-567-CHB

United States District Court, W.D. Kentucky, Louisville Division

September 15, 2023

MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER

CLARIA HORN BOOM, UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT JUDGE EASTERN AND WESTERN DISTRICTS OF KENTUCKY

This matter is before the Court on the Defendant University of Louisville's Motion to Dismiss, [R. 19]. Plaintiff Samineh Mesbah filed a response, [R. 22], and Defendant replied, [R. 23]. The matter is therefore fully briefed and ripe for review. For the reasons set forth below, the Court will grant in part and deny in part the Motion to Dismiss, [R. 19].

I. BACKGROUND

The following facts are taken from Plaintiff's Amended Complaint. [R. 16]. For clarity, the Court has attempted to recite the alleged facts in chronological order.

In or around August 2013, Plaintiff enrolled as a PhD student at the University of Louisville. Id. ¶ 15. Sometime in or around mid-2016, while Plaintiff was a PhD student, her advisor asked her to collaborate with Dr. Rejc.^[1] Id. ¶ 17. Dr. Rejc served as Plaintiff's supervisor on that project. Id. Plaintiff alleges that, “[a]lmost immediately, Dr. Rejc began making constant inappropriate and unwanted sexual advances toward” her. Id. ¶ 18. These alleged sexual advances included “standing behind her and rubbing her shoulders on multiple occasions, placing his hand on her thigh while working on a project together, and repeatedly kicking her

2

foot under the table in meetings.” Id. Dr. Rejc did not make similar advances towards any of his male students or coworkers. Id.

In or around February 2018, while Plaintiff was still a PhD student, Dr. Rejc asked Plaintiff to “go out for drinks to celebrate” the submission of a project manuscript. Id. ¶ 19. Plaintiff was under the impression that other coworkers from the project would be joining as well, and she agreed to attend. Id. Upon arriving at the bar, however, Plaintiff “was shocked” to see that Dr. Rejc had invited only Plaintiff. Id. This made Plaintiff “extremely uncomfortable,” and she left as soon as possible. Id.

In or around June 2018, while Plaintiff was still a PhD student, Plaintiff intentionally reached out to Dr. Rejc's wife at a charity event. Id. ¶ 22. Plaintiff alleges that she did so, “hoping to make Dr. Rejc's unwanted sexual advances and touching to stop (sic).” Id. Plaintiff introduced herself to Dr. Rejc's wife and engaged in a conversation with her in his presence, allegedly “establishing a clear rejection of his personal advances toward her.” Id. Plaintiff alleges that “Dr. Rejc was clearly irritated by this interaction.” Id.

Plaintiff alleges that her interaction with Dr. Rejc's wife at the charity event “ceased his sexual harassment but caused Dr. Rejc to immediately begin retaliating against Plaintiff Mesbah through verbal and physical abuse.” Id. ¶ 23. This alleged abuse included “constantly berating Plaintiff Mesbah's work and professional worth on a daily basis and knit-picking (sic) every aspect of her projects.” Id. Plaintiff describes this behavior as “daily attacks” on her person and her work that “became increasingly hostile and aggressive over the next several months, to the point where [Dr. Rejc] was almost constantly disparaging her and her work.” Id.

In or around September 2018, while Plaintiff was still a PhD student, Plaintiff attended World Fest in Louisville with a friend. Id. ¶ 20. She discovered that Dr. Rejc appeared in all of

3

the photographs that she had taken with her friend at the event. Id. From this, Plaintiff concludes that “Dr. Rejc had been stalking Plaintiff Mesbah for several hours during the event, intentionally following very close behind her and her friend but not showing himself.” Id. This behavior caused Plaintiff “to fear [Dr. Rejc's] intentions toward her as clearly being more than her supervisor at work.” Id.

In or around June 2019, Plaintiff was hired by the University of Louisville in a postdoctoral research position at the University's Kentucky Spinal Cord Injury Research Center. Id. ¶ 16. Plaintiff alleges that, “[d]uring her time as a PhD student and during her employment” with the University, “Dr. Rejc constantly made inappropriate and unwanted sexual advances towards Plaintiff which contributed to the hostile work environment.” Id. ¶ 21. This behavior included “repeatedly asking Plaintiff out for drinks, constantly touching Plaintiff inappropriately, constantly staring at Plaintiff's chest and commenting on Plaintiff's outfits, repeatedly asking Plaintiff if she has a boyfriend, and constantly sending Plaintiff text messages over the weekends and on non-working time.” Id.

Sometime in the spring of 2019, Plaintiff alleges that Dr. Rejc's behavior became physically abusive. Id. ¶ 23. She refers to an occasion where Dr. Rejc “was attacking [her] about her work and making a disparaging comment about her professional worth” when he “aggressively smacked [her] on the back of her head.” Id. At this point, Plaintiff “knew that she had to move forward with filing a complaint against Dr. Rejc.” Id. ¶ 24. She began to confide in her colleagues about Dr. Rejc's behavior and sought advice on how to proceed. Id.

In or around August 2019, Plaintiff made a formal complaint with her supervisor, Dr. April Herrity, regarding Dr. Rejc's “constant sexually hostile and retaliatory behavior.” Id. Dr. Herrity directed Plaintiff to report her complaints to Director Susan Harkema. Id.

4

In or around September 2019, Plaintiff told Director Harkema that she wished to file a formal Title VII and/or Title IX complaint against Dr. Rejc. Id. ¶ 26. Director Harkema allegedly demanded that Plaintiff Mesbah not file a complaint, and instead insisted that she would handle the matter internally. Id. Director Harkema then removed Plaintiff from Dr. Rejc's supervision and promised that Plaintiff would “never have to work with him again.” Id. However, Director Harkema never confronted Dr. Rejc about his behavior toward Plaintiff. Id. ¶ 27. As a result, Dr. Rejc “continued to make repeated inappropriate and unwanted sexual advances toward Plaintiff, and continually retaliated against Plaintiff Mesbah for refusing his advances.” Id.

In or around February 2021, Director Harkema promised Plaintiff that “she would see to it that Plaintiff Mesbah be given a Term Assistant Professorship Position and the ‘Core Director' role, which came with a significant pay raise.” Id. ¶ 28. In or around early May 2021, Director Harkema communicated with Dr. Zhang, the chair of the Science and Engineering Department, about offering Plaintiff a Term Assistant Professorship Position with the Computer Science Department. Id. ¶ 29. Dr. Zhang then indicated to Plaintiff “that he would welcome her joining his department.” Id.

In or around May or June 2021, Plaintiff was notified by the University that her name had been used in Dr. Rejc's grant submission. Id. ¶ 30. Plaintiff reviewed the submission and believed that Dr. Rejc had misappropriated Plaintiff's work and submitted her work under his own name. Id. Plaintiff was shocked by this and concerned that, if the grant were funded, she might be required to work with Dr. Rejc again. Id.

Plaintiff complained to Director Harkema and “describe[ed] what she believed was Dr. Rejc's retaliatory unauthorized use of her name and materials for his benefit, and for seemingly creating a future opportunity for her work at [the University] to be under his control.” Id.

5

Director Harkema “scolded Plaintiff” and told her to “move on and not dwell on this.” Id. ¶ 31. She also told Plaintiff that her unwillingness to ignore Dr. Rejc's behavior suggested that Plaintiff was suffering from “mental problems.” Id. Director Harkema also told Plaintiff that “the incidents happened a long time ago and [Dr. Rejc] hasn't done anything since then.” Id.

Plaintiff insisted that she wanted to report the incidents. Id. ¶ 32. Director Harkema told Plaintiff that there was “nothing [Defendant University] can do about it” because Plaintiff had not reported the incidents earlier. Id. Director Harkema then threatened that, if Plaintiff reported Dr. Rejc, Plaintiff would not receive the Core Director promotion. Id.

Plaintiff reported Dr. Rejc's behavior to Human Resources. Id. ¶ 33. Director Harkema tried to downplay Dr. Rejc's behavior to Human Resources, but Human Resources insisted that the matter be reported “to the University level.” Id. ¶¶ 34-35. Human Resources ultimately reported the matter to the University's Title IX office. Id. ¶ 36.

A Title IX investigation occurred over the next several months. During the investigation, Director Harkema “continued to retaliate against Plaintiff Mesbah,” and told Plaintiff that she would have already given her the new position and raise, but now she needed to wait until the investigation concluded because “we cannot have someone working for us that cannot collaborate with everyone else because we are a highly collaborative center.” Id. ¶ 37. Director Harkema also told Plaintiff she would need to speak to Dr. Zhang about approval for the position.

In September 2021, Plaintiff met with Dr. Zhang, who expressed an interest in hiring Plaintiff as a Term Assistant Professor so long as he received a letter from the Research Center stating that it would “financially support the salary for this position.” Id. ¶ 38. Plaintiff was ultimately told by the Finance Department that it was working with Director Harkema to obtain

6

the letter. Id. ¶ 39. The letter was never submitted to Dr. Zhang. Id. In or around October 2021, Plaintiff was informed that the Director of the Finance Department and Director Harkema would not be giving Plaintiff a promotion. Id. ¶ 40. The following month, November 2021, Dr. Zhang informed Plaintiff that he had never received the funding letter for her position with...