Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-casd-3_17-cv-02351/USCOURTS-casd-3_17-cv-02351-0/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 442
Nature of Suit: Civil Rights Employment
Cause of Action: 28:1332ed Diversity-Employment Discrimination

---

1 

2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

FILED 

JUN I 3 2018 

CLERK, U.S. DISTRICT COURT 

SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 

BY =-'.i DEPUTY 

8 

9 

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 

10 

11 RANJANA DAS, Case No.: 17-cv-2351-WQH-MDD 

12 Plaintiff, 

13 

14 

15 

16 

v. 

TELEFLEX, INCORPORATED 

and GARY GILL, 

Defendants. 

17 HA YES, Judge: 

ORDER 

18 The matter before the Court is the Motion to Dismiss (ECF No. 5) filed by 

19 Defendants Gary Gill and Teleflex, Incorporated. 

20 I. Background 

21 On September 29, 2017, Plaintiff Ranjana Das initiated this action by filing the 

22 Complaint (ECF No. 1-4) against Defendants Gary Gill and Teleflex, Incorporated 

23 ("Teleflex") in the Superior Court of the State of California. The Complaint brings ten 

24 causes of action. Comp!. at 1. The Complaint's second cause of action is for harassment 

25 based on disability and medical condition, and is brought against Gill and Teleflex. Id. at 

26 11. The Complaint's sixth cause of action is for harassment based on age, religious creed, 

27 ancestry, and marital status, and is also brought against both Gill and Teleflex. Id. at 18. 

28 

17-cv-2351-WQH-MDD 

Case 3:17-cv-02351-WQH-MDD Document 21 Filed 06/13/18 PageID.<pageID> Page 1 of 8
1 On November 20, 2017, the Defendants removed the case to this Court. (ECF No. 

2 l).'On November 27, 2017, the Defendants filed the Motion to Dismiss (ECF No. 5). The 

$.' . IVlot~on t<;) Djsmiss, seeks dismissal of Das' s second cause of action for harassment based . " " 

4 · · on disability and medical condition and Das's sixth cause of action for harassment based 

5 on age, religious creed, ancestry, and marital status. Id. On April 4, 2018, Das filed an 

6 Opposition to the Motion to Dismiss. (ECF No. 15). On April 11, 2018, the Defendants 

7 filed a Reply in Support of the Motion to Dismiss. (ECF No. 17). 

8 On April 10, 2018, Das and the Defendants filed a document "stipulat[ing] pursuant 

9 to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(a)(l)(A)(ii) to a dismissal without prejudice of the 

10 following causes of action: (1) The second and sixth cause of action as to Defendant Gary 

11 Gill[ and] (2) The second cause of action as to Defendant Teleflex." (ECF No. 16 at 2). 

12 The only claim challenged by the Motion to Dismiss that remains pending after the Joint 

13 Stipulation ofDismissal (ECF No. 16) is Das's claim against Teleflex for harassment based 

14 on age, religious creed, ancestry, and marital status. 

15 II. Allegations 

16 Das "is a 58[-]year[-]old Asian Indian woman .... She is a follower of the Radha 

17 Soami movement, a religious sect that prohibits consuming alc[]ohol, meat, and any animal 

18 products." Compl. at ii 14. 

19 

20 

21 

22 

On May 4, 2014, Plaintiff was offered employment by TELEFLEX as a 

Medical Device Telesales Coordinator, reporting to Defendant GILL, the 

Director of Training and Inside Sales .... [T]hroughout her employment with 

TELEFLEX, Plaintiff performed her required duties beyond expectations and 

consistently met sales goals and other criteria established by the company. 

Id. at ii 16. 

23 

24 

25 

26 

27 

28 

Plaintiff wished to change her career path to focus on inside sales. 

When a position in Anesthesia in Inside Sales opened up in September of 

2014, Plaintiff applied for the job and interviewed with Defendant director 

Gary Gill, her ultimate supervisor, for the position. The person who was 

ultimately hired to take the position she interviewed for was a Caucasian 

male ... named Griffin Dunzar, with no medical sales background and no 

clinical sales experience. After Plaintiff found out that the position was filled, 

she asked Defendant GILL why she was ruled out for the Anesthesia position 

2 

l 7-cv-2351-WQH-MDD 

Case 3:17-cv-02351-WQH-MDD Document 21 Filed 06/13/18 PageID.<pageID> Page 2 of 8
1 

2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

in favor of Mr. Dunzar. Defendant GILL[,] who referred to Plaintiff as 

"mature[,]" stated that he preferred to hire young people who are starting their 

lives and that Mr. Dunzar reminded him of himself when he started at 

TELEFLEX: "He is young, starting a family ... his family lives in Newport 

Beach ... he is getting a boat and I want us to be able to enjoy, have a beer, 

and be with our families on Griffin's boat when he gets it." 

In total, Defendant GILL rejected Plaintiffs request to transfer to an 

Anesthesia Inside Sales representative position on four occasions. Each time 

he hired a younger yet inexperienced representative, including: Griffin 

Dunzar, a white male, age 30, with no medical sales experience; James 

Bummeister, a white male, age 28; Stacy Sinosohn, a white 27[-]year[-]old 

female with no medical device sales experience; and Jason Schuman, a white 

male in his early 20s, with no medical sales experience. 

10 Id. at~~ 17-19 (omissions in original). 

11 

12 

13 

14 

15 

PLAINTIFF was made to feel unwelcome from company celebrations 

because most, if not all, of the picnics, parties and meals featured drinking and 

exclusively non-vegetarian food, even the salads, completely limiting 

Plaintiffs ability to participate in such events. On one occasion, Defendant 

GILL, knowing that Plaintiff was a vegetarian, booked a table for a dinner for 

the sales team at a Brazilian steakhouse, calling Plaintiff a "real trooper." 

Id. at~ 28. On one occasion, "as Defendant GILL was going to his office, he remarked to 

16 Plaintiff, 'Hey, you have to drink to work in Anesthesia.' Plaintiff did not say anything, 

17 but the entire sales team applauded and cheered loudly." Id. at~ 26. 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

23 

24 

25 

26 

27 

28 

[W]hen Plaintiff changed her last name from Litch to Das to signify her 

commit[]ment to her Radha Soami faith, [Michelle] Cassie and Beryl Hodgin, 

[]Respiratory [M]anager[s] at TELEFLEX, asked Plaintiff why she changed 

her last name. Plaintiff replied that she did so because the name "Das" meant 

["]servant of God["] in Hindi, and it was conducive for her spiritual 

experience and path. In response, Ms. Hodgin and Ms. Cassie mocked 

Plaintiff and her name, and giggled to each other, "yeah, she's a servant all 

right." Plaintiff felt terribly humiliated and targeted for being different in race, 

age, and faith from her colleagues. 

Id. at~ 22. 

On March 4, 2015, Plaintiff made a complaint to Defendant GILL about the 

continuous rude and demeaning actions by Ms. Cassie and Ms. Hodgin toward 

Plaintiff which were directed at her faith and race. In response, Defendant 

GILL reiterated the previous comments he made about preferring employees 

who have children of their own, and with whom he can share a beer[]. 

3 

l 7-cv-2351-WQH-MDD 

Case 3:17-cv-02351-WQH-MDD Document 21 Filed 06/13/18 PageID.<pageID> Page 3 of 8
1 

2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

Id. at, 23. 

At [a] training [in North Carolina], Ms. Hodgin[] put her arm around 

Whitney, an engineer who is Caucasian, and said "This is Whitney. She is an 

engineer. And now here we have this ... "and pointed to Prashant, the Indian 

engineer who had been participating in training, clearly indicating her disdain 

for the non-Caucasian employee. Plaintiff felt humiliated that people of 

Indian[ ]origin[] like herself were being mocked, and nodded her head in 

disbeliefthatMs. Hodgin would say such a thing. 

7 Id. at, 24 (omission in original). "[A]fter returning from the North Carolina training, 

8 

9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

Plaintiff made another complaint to Defendant GILL to inform him about Ms. Hodgin's 

comments." Id. at, 25. 

Plaintiff asked Defendant GILL if he could transfer her out of Respiratory 

because she did not want to be subjected to the hostility and pejorative 

comments concerning her ethnicity or religion, under Ms. Cassie and Ms. 

Hodgin. Defendant GILL smirked and said that he would speak to them, and 

said that he did not have any open positions in any other division, and that 

Plaintiff should get back to work so he could get back to his. 

14 Id. "On one occasion Defendant GILL allowed the hostility towards Plaintiff from Ms. 

15 Caissie[ll and Ms. Hodges[2

J to not only escalate but encouraged the behavior by allowing 

16 Ms. Hodges to systematically and consistently assign some of Plaintiffs high dollar 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

accounts to field agents." Id. at, 28. 

On June 30, 2015, Plaintiff was presented with a Performance 

Improvement Plan by Ms. Cassie. The report was riddled with errors and 

factually untrue particularly with regard to Plaintiffs past performance. 

Specifically, Plaintiffs performance had never been previously discussed or 

questioned. Moreover, she had continually performed over her mandated 

quota and, for the prior three months, she exceeded her goals with April at 

105%, May at 105.8%, and June at 101.3%. 

23 Id. at, 30. 

24 

25 

26 1 The Complaint alternates between two spellings of Michelle's last name: "Cassie" and "Caissie." 

27 

28 

The Court will refer to Michelle Cassie. 

2 The Complaint alternates between two spellings of Beryl's last name: "Hodgin" and "Hodges." The 

Court will refer to Beryl Hodgin. 

4 

l 7-cv-2351-WQH-MDD 

Case 3:17-cv-02351-WQH-MDD Document 21 Filed 06/13/18 PageID.<pageID> Page 4 of 8
1 III. Standard of Review 

2 Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b)(6) permits dismissal for "failure to state a 

3 claim upon which relief can be granted." Fed. R. Civ. P. 12(b)(6). Federal Rule of Civil 

4 Procedure 8(a)(2) provides "[a] pleading that states a claim for relief must contain ... a 

5 short and plain statement of the claim showing that the pleader is entitled to relief." "A 

6 district court's dismissal for failure to state a claim under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 

7 l 2(b )( 6) is proper if there is a 'lack of a cognizable legal theory or the absence of sufficient 

8 facts alleged under a cognizable legal theory."' Conservation Force v. Salazar, 646 F.3d 

9 1240, 1242 (9th Cir. 2011) (quoting Balistreri v. Pacifica Police Dep 't, 901 F.2d 696, 699 

10 (9th Cir. 1990)). 

11 "To survive a motion to dismiss, a complaint must contain sufficient factual matter, 

12 accepted as true, to 'state a claim to relief that is plausible on its face."' Ashcroft v. Iqbal, 

13 556 U.S. 662, 678 (2009) (quoting Twombly, 550 U.S. at 570). "A claim has facial 

14 plausibility when the plaintiff pleads factual content that allows the court to draw the 

15 reasonable inference that the defendant is liable for the misconduct alleged." Id. (citation 

16 omitted). "When there are well-pleaded factual allegations, a court should assume their 

17 veracity and then determine whether they plausibly give rise to an entitlement to relief." 

18 Id. at 679. 

19 IV. Discussion 

20 The Defendants contend that Das has failed to state a claim against Teleflex for 

21 harassment based on age, religious creed, ancestry, and marital status. (ECF No. 5-1 at 5-

22 8). The Defendants contend that 

23 

24 

25 

26 

[Das] has only alleged a "few isolated incidents" and thus has not met her 

burden of stating facts that reflect that Gill or any other Teleflex employee 

engaged in conduct, based on Plaintiffs age, ... religious creed, ancestry and 

marital status, that was severe or pervasive, much less sufficiently severe or 

pervasive, so as to alter the conditions of employment and create an abusive 

working environment. 

27 Id. at 8 (quotingMcKenna v. Permanente Medical Group, Inc., 894 F. Supp. 2d 1258, 1281 

28 (E.D. Cal. 2012)). 

5 

l 7-cv-2351-WQH-MDD 

Case 3:17-cv-02351-WQH-MDD Document 21 Filed 06/13/18 PageID.<pageID> Page 5 of 8
1 Das contends that she has stated a claim against Teleflex for harassment based on 

2 age, religious creed, ancestry, and marital status in violation of California Government 

3 Code§ 12940U). (ECF No. 15 at 3-5). Das contends that, 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

[t]aken together, the facts pied can be deemed to be a continuous pattern of 

incidents of harassment that could allow a reasonable person in the Plaintiffs 

position, namely someone of Indian[ ]origin, who belongs to a minority 

religion whose colleagues were aware that she belonged to these protected 

classifications, to plausibly feel that she was harassed on account of her 

membership in a protected class, including on account of her ancestry and 

religion. 

9 Id. at 5. 

10 California Government Code § 12940U)(l) makes it unlawful for an employer to 

11 harass an employee because of the employee's age, religious creed, ancestry, or marital 

12 status. Cal. Gov't Code§ 12940U)(l). To state a claim for harassment under§ 12940U)(l), 

13 the acts allegedly constituting harassment "cannot be occasional, isolated, sporadic, or 

14 trivial[;] rather the plaintiff must show a concerted pattern of harassment of a repeated, 

15 routine or a generalized nature." Aguilar v. Avis Rent A Car Sys., Inc., 980 P.2d 846, 851 

16 (Cal. 1999) (quoting Fisher v. San Pedro Peninsula Hosp., 262 Cal. Rptr. 842, 852 (Cal. 

17 Ct. App. 1989)). 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

23 

24 

25 

26 

Whether the conduct of the alleged harassers was sufficiently severe or 

pervasive to create a hostile or abusive working environment depends on the 

totality of the circumstances. These may include the frequency of the 

discriminatory conduct; its severity; whether it is physically threatening or 

humiliating, or a mere offensive utterance; and whether it unreasonably 

interferes with an employee's work performance. Common sense, and an 

appropriate sensibility to social context, will enable courts and juries to 

distinguish between simple teasing or roughhousing and conduct that a 

reasonable person in the plaintiffs position would find severely hostile or 

abusive. As in sex-based harassment claims, the plaintiff must prove that the 

defendant's conduct would have interfered with a reasonable employee's 

work performance and would have seriously affected the psychological wellbeing of a reasonable employee and that he or she was actually offended. 

27 Rehmani v. Superior Court, 139 Cal. Rptr. 3d 464, 469 (Cal. Ct. App. 2012) (alterations, 

28 omissions, and quotations omitted). 

6 

l 7-cv-2351-WQH-MDD 

Case 3:17-cv-02351-WQH-MDD Document 21 Filed 06/13/18 PageID.<pageID> Page 6 of 8
1 Das contends that the following acts constitute a pattern of harassment against her 

2 on account of her status as a single, fifty-eight-year-old Asian Indian member of the Radha 

3 Soami religious sect (which prohibits consuming alcohol and animal products): 

4 I. Gill's rejection of Das' s four requests to transfer to an Anesthesia Inside Sales 

5 Representative position in favor of four white candidates age thirty or under, 

6 Comp!. at if 19; 

7 2. Gill's explanation for rejecting one of Das's requests to transfer in favor of 

8 Griffin Dunzar, during which he stated that Das was "mature," that "he preferred 

9 to hire young people," that "Dunzar reminded him of himself," and that he 

10 wanted to "have a beer" and spend family time with Dunzar; id. at if 18; 

11 3. Teleflex's company-sponsored social events, which "featured drinking and 

12 exclusively non-vegetarian food," id. at if 28; 

13 4. Gill's remark to Das that "you have to drink to work in Anesthesia," after which 

14 "the entire sales team applauded and cheered loudly," id. at if 26; 

15 5. Comments made by Hodgin and Cassie mocking Das' s name change, id. at if 22; 

16 6. An incident during which Hodgin put her arm around a white engineer and said 

17 "This is Whitney. She is an engineer. And now here we have this ... " then 

18 pointed to an Indian engineer in a manner that "clearly indicat[ ed] her disdain for 

19 the non-Caucasian employee," id. at if 24 (omission in original); 

20 7. Hodgin's "systematic[] and consistent[] assign[ment of] some of Plaintiff's high 

21 dollar accounts to field agents," which occurred with Gill's permission, id. at 

22 , 28; 

23 8. Gill's responses to Das's complaints about Hodgin and Cassie, which included 

24 smirking and "reiterated the previous comments he made about preferring 

25 employees who have children of their own, and with whom he can share a beer," 

26 id. at iii! 23, 25; and 

27 9. Cassie's Performance Improvement Plan for Das, which "was riddled with errors 

28 and factually untrue," id. at if 30. 

7 

l 7-cv-2351-WQH-MDD 

Case 3:17-cv-02351-WQH-MDD Document 21 Filed 06/13/18 PageID.<pageID> Page 7 of 8
,, 

1 Accepting all ofDas's allegations as true and drawing all reasonable inferences in 

2 Das's favor, Das has alleged conduct that is "sufficiently severe or pervasive to create a 

3 hostile or abusive working environment." Rehmani, 139 Cal. Rptr. 3d at 469. It is plausible 

4 that the alleged conduct "would have interfered with a reasonable employee's work 

5 performance and would have seriously affected the psychological well-being of a 

6 reasonable employee." Id. It is reasonable to infer that Das was offended by the alleged 

7 conduct. See id.; Compl. at ~ 22 ("Plaintiff felt terribly humiliated and targeted for being 

8 different in race, age, and faith from her colleagues."), ~ 24 ("Plaintiff felt humiliated .. . 

9 ."); ~ 28 ("PLAINTIFF was made to feel unwelcome from company celebrations .... "). 

10 The Court finds that Das has "alleged a concerted pattern of harassment of a repeated, 

11 routine or a generalized nature" not merely "occasional, isolated, sporadic, or trivial" 

12 conduct. Aguilar, 980 P.2d at 851 (quoting Fisher, 262 Cal. Rptr. at 852). 

13 V. Conclusion 

14 The Motion to Dismiss (ECF No. 5) is DENIED. 

15 

16 DATED: 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

23 

24 

25 

26 

27 

28 

WILLIAM Q. HA 

United States Di 1ct Judge 

8 

l 7-cv-2351-WQH-MDD 

Case 3:17-cv-02351-WQH-MDD Document 21 Filed 06/13/18 PageID.<pageID> Page 8 of 8