1

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA

CASE NO. ____________-CIV-___________/____________

DIANA AREVALO, an individual,

Plaintiff,

v.

APPETITES, INC., a Florida Corporation,

Defendant.

_____________________________________/

COMPLAINT

1. Plaintiff, DIANA AREVALO (hereinafter referred to as “Plaintiff” and 

“AREVALO”), was an employee of Defendant, APPETITES, INC., a Florida Corporation 

(hereinafter “Defendant” or “APPETITES”), and brings this action against Defendant for alleged 

sex/gender discrimination, as well as retaliation, in violation of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act, 

42 U.S.C. §2000 et seq., and the Florida Civil Rights Act (FCRA), Florida Statutes §760.01 et 

seq.

2. At all times material to this action, AREVALO has been an individual residing in 

Broward County, Florida, within the jurisdiction of this Court.

3. Defendant, APPETITES, has at all times material to this Complaint owned and 

operated a catering business in South Florida based at 3420 W. Hallandale Beach Boulevard, 

Pembroke Park, Florida 33023 in Broward County, within the jurisdiction of this Court.

4. Jurisdiction is conferred on this Court by 28 U.S.C. §§1331, 1343, and 1367.

5. Venue is proper in this Court pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §1391, as a substantial part of 

the events giving rise to this action occurred in Broward County, within the jurisdiction of the 

Case 0:20-cv-61345-XXXX Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 07/06/2020 Page 1 of 15
2

United States District Court for the Southern District of Florida.

6. In or around October 2018, ARVELO started working for APPETITES as a 

Delivery Driver. 

7. At all times material to this action, AREVALO was an employee of APPETITES

within the meaning of Title VII, 42 U.S.C. §2000e(f), and the FCRA, F.S. §760.10(1)(a).

8. At all times material to this action, APPETITES was AREVALO’s employer 

within the meaning of Title VII, 42 U.S.C. §2000e(b), and the FCRA, F.S. §760.02(7).

9. On or around July 25, 2019, AREVALO injured her back and leg on the job while 

working for APPETITES. 

10. After AREVALO’s injury at work, Plaintiff notified APPETITES’ owner, Steve 

Moscovitch, that she would be absent from work for a few days. 

11. On or around July 30, 2019, AREVALO went to APPETITES’ office to talk to 

Defendant about a leave form and Steve Moscovitch told Plaintiff that: (a) APPETITES had a 

male employee doing Plaintiff’s job while she had been out of work; (b) the male employee did 

the job faster than AREVALO; and (c) Plaintiff would need to complete deliveries and other

work for APPETITES as quickly as the male employee.

12. Further on or around July 30, 2019, AREVALO objected to Steve Moscovitch

discriminating against Plaintiff because of her sex/gender, female, but Moscovitch told 

AREVALO that a male employee “can do the job better than [Plaintiff] could anyway” and

Moscovitch terminated AREVALO’s employment.

13. At all times material to this action, AREVALO was capable of performing her 

essential job duties as a Delivery Driver for APPETITES.

Case 0:20-cv-61345-XXXX Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 07/06/2020 Page 2 of 15
3

14. The reason proffered by APPETITES in July 2019 for the termination of

AREVALO’s employment was (a) discriminatory because of Plaintiff’s sex/gender, female; and 

(b) was retaliatory because AREVALO opposed APPETITES disparate treatment of her because 

of her sex/gender, in violation of Title VII and the FCRA.

15. All conditions precedent to the institution of the claims in this Complaint have 

either occurred or been waived.

EXHAUSTION OF ADMINISTRATIVE REMEDIES

16. On September 25, 2019, AREVALO dual filed a Charge of Discrimination 

against APPETITES with the United States Equal Employment Opportunity Commission 

(EEOC) and the Florida Commission on Human Relations (FCHR) alleging sex/gender, as well 

as retaliation, in violation of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act, 42 U.S.C. §2000 et seq. A copy of 

AREVALO’s EEOC Charge, Charge No. 510-2019-06647, is attached hereto as Exhibit A.

17. On or around May 6, 2020, the EEOC issued a Notice of Right to Sue to 

AREVALO, see Exhibit B. 

18. This Complaint is being filed with the Court within Sixty-One (61) days of 

AREVALO’s receipt of the Notice of Right to Sue in connection with Charge No. 510-2019-

06647 and Plaintiff has exhausted all administrative remedies on the Title VII claims pled in the 

Complaint.

19. As of July 6, 2020, more than One Hundred and Eighty (180) days have passed 

since the filing of AREVALO’s Charge of Discrimination on September 25, 2019 and the FCHR 

did not issue any determination concerning AREVALO’s Charge. As a result, pursuant to F.S. 

§760.11(18), which provides that in the event that the FCHR fails to conciliate or determine 

whether there is reasonable cause on any complaint under that section within 180 days of the 

Case 0:20-cv-61345-XXXX Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 07/06/2020 Page 3 of 15
4

filing of the complaint, an aggrieved person may file a civil action “as if the commission 

determined that there was reasonable cause,” ARVEVALO has exhausted all administrative 

remedies under Florida as well as Federal law.

20. All conditions precedent to the institution of this action have either occurred or 

been waived.

COUNT I

VIOLATION OF TITLE VII OF THE CIVIL RIGHTS ACT OF 1964,

42 U.S.C. §2000e ET SEQ. - UNLAWFUL SEX/GENDER DISCRIMINATION

Plaintiff, DIANA AREVALO, reasserts and reaffirms the allegations of Paragraphs 1 

through 20 as if fully set forth herein and further states that this is an action against APPETITES, 

INC., for sex/gender discrimination in violation of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, as 

amended, 42 U.S.C. §2000e et seq.

21. Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, as amended, provides that it is unlawful 

for an employer to “discharge any individual, or otherwise to discriminate against any individual 

with respect to his compensation, terms, conditions, or privileges of employment, because of 

such individual's ... sex ...” 42 U.S.C. §2000e-2(a)(1).

22. At all times material to this action, APPETITES had fifteen (15) or more 

employees for each working day in each of twenty (20) or more calendar weeks in the current or 

preceding calendar year within the meaning of 42 U.S.C. §2000e(b).

23. In July 2019, AREVALO was subjected to disparate treatment by APPETITES

because of her sex/gender, female, by, inter alia, APPETITES: (a) subjecting AREVALO to 

discriminatory comments about her sex/gender, female, in comparison to male employees; and 

(b) terminating AREVALO’s employment on or around July 2019 because of Plaintiff’s

sex/gender, female, in violation of 42 U.S.C. §2000e-2(a)(1).

Case 0:20-cv-61345-XXXX Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 07/06/2020 Page 4 of 15
5

24. APPETITES’ disparate treatment of AREVALO was so severe and pervasive that 

it altered, the terms, conditions, and privileges of AREVALO’s employment with Defendant

culminating with the termination of Plaintiff’s employment in July 2019.

25. A motivating factor behind APPETITES’ termination of AREVALO’s

employment in July 2019 was Plaintiff’s sex/gender, female, in violation of 42 U.S.C. §2000e2(a)(1).

26. APPETITES’ violations of Title VII were intentional and were done with malice 

and reckless disregard for AREVALO’ rights as guaranteed under the laws of the United 

States. 

27. AREVALO has suffered lost earnings and employment benefits, emotional 

distress, loss of self-esteem and other injuries as a direct result of APPETITES’ violations of 42 

U.S.C. §2000e-2(a)(1).

28. Pursuant to 42 U.S.C. §2000e-5(k) and §1988(b), AREVALO is entitled to 

recover from APPETITES her reasonable attorneys’ fees and costs.

WHEREFORE, Plaintiff, DIANA AREVALO, demands judgment against Defendant, 

APPETITES, INC., for back pay, employment benefits, other compensation including bonuses, 

compensatory damages, equitable relief including but not limited to front pay, punitive damages, 

injunctive relief, interest, attorney’s fees, costs, expert fees and such other and further relief as 

this Honorable Court deems proper.

COUNT II

RETALIATION IN VIOLATION OF TITLE VII 

OF THE CIVIL RIGHTS ACT OF 1964, 42 U.S.C. §2000e ET SEQ.

Plaintiff, DIANA AREVALO, reasserts and reaffirms the allegations of Paragraphs 1 

through 20 as if fully set forth herein and further states that this is an action against APPETITES, 

Case 0:20-cv-61345-XXXX Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 07/06/2020 Page 5 of 15
6

INC., for Retaliation in violation of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, as amended, 42 

U.S.C. §2000e-3.

29. Pursuant to 42 U.S.C. §2000e-3(a), “[i]t shall be an unlawful employment 

practice for an employer to discriminate against any of his employees .... because [the 

employee] has opposed any practice made an unlawful employment practice by this subchapter, 

or because he has made a charge, testified, assisted, or participated in any manner in an 

investigation, proceeding, or hearing under this subchapter.”

30. When AREVALO objected to Steve Moscovitch on July 30, 2019 discriminating 

against Plaintiff because of her sex/gender, female, AREVALO engaged in protected activity 

within the meaning of Title VII, 42 U.S.C. §2000e-3(a).

31. AREVALO reasonably and in good faith believed that Moscovitch’s derogatory 

and demeaning statements about male employees being superior to Plaintiff, a female employee, 

were unlawful employment practices.

32. APPETITES intentionally retaliated against AREVALO on or around July 30, 

2019 when, following AREVALO’s objections to Moscovitch’s discriminatory statements about 

her being inferior to male employees, Defendant terminated AREVALO’s employment, in 

violation of 42 U.S.C. §2000e-3(a).

33. APPETITES’ termination of AREVALO’s employment on or around July 30,

2019 just moments after AREVALO objected directly to Moscovitch’s derogatory and 

demeaning statements about male employees being superior to Plaintiff, a female employee, was 

unlawful retaliation in violation of 42 U.S.C. §2000e-3(a) because of Plaintiff’s good faith 

objections to APPETITES’ gender discrimination.

Case 0:20-cv-61345-XXXX Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 07/06/2020 Page 6 of 15
7

34. The fact that AREVALO engaged in activity protected by Title VII was a 

motivating factor in APPETITES’ termination of Plaintiff’s employment in July 2019, in 

violation of 42 U.S.C. §2000e-3(a).

35. APPETITES’ unlawful retaliation against AREVALO was intentional and done 

with malice and reckless disregard for AREVALO’s rights as guaranteed under Title VII. 

36. As a direct and proximate result of APPETITES’ unlawful retaliation against 

AREVALO, Plaintiff has suffered damages and was deprived of job-related economic benefits, 

all in amounts to be established at trial, including suffering a loss of earnings, emotional distress, 

loss of self-esteem and other injuries as a direct result of APPETITES’ violations of 42 U.S.C. 

§2000e-3(a).

37. Pursuant to 42 U.S.C. §2000e-5(k) and §1988(b), AREVALO is entitled to 

recover her reasonable attorneys’ fees and costs from APPETITES.

WHEREFORE, Plaintiff, DIANA AREVALO, demands judgment against Defendant, 

APPETITES, INC., for back pay, employment benefits, other compensation including bonuses, 

compensatory damages, equitable relief including but not limited to front pay, punitive damages, 

injunctive relief, interest, attorney’s fees, costs, expert fees and such other and further relief as 

this Honorable Court deems proper.

COUNT III

SEX/GENDER DISCRIMINATION IN VIOLATION OF 

THE FLORIDA CIVIL RIGHTS ACT 

Plaintiff, DIANA AREVALO, reasserts and reaffirms the allegations set forth in 

paragraphs 1 through 20 above and further states that this is an action against APPETITES, INC.

for sex/gender discrimination in violation of Florida Statutes §760.10(1).

Case 0:20-cv-61345-XXXX Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 07/06/2020 Page 7 of 15
8

38. The Florida Civil Rights Act provides that it is an unlawful employment practice 

for an employer “[t]o discharge . . . any individual, or otherwise to discriminate against any 

individual with respect to compensation, terms, conditions, or privileges of employment, because 

of such individual’s . . . religion . . .” F.S. §760.10(1)(a). 

39. At all times material to this action, APPETITES was an employer within the 

meaning of F.S. §760.02(7).

40. At all times material to this action, AREVALO was an employee of APPETITES

within the meaning of F.S. §760.10(1)(a).

41. At all times material to this action, AREVALO has been an aggrieved person 

within the meaning of F.S. §760.02(10).

42. In July 2019, AREVALO was subjected to disparate treatment by APPETITES

because of her sex/gender, female, by, inter alia, APPETITES: (a) subjecting AREVALO to 

discriminatory comments about her sex/gender, female, in comparison to male employees; and 

(b) terminating AREVALO’s employment on or around July 2019 because of Plaintiff’s

sex/gender, female, in violation of F.S. §760.10(1).

43. APPETITES’ disparate treatment of AREVALO was so severe and pervasive that 

it altered, the terms, conditions, and privileges of AREVALO’ employment with Defendant

culminating with the termination of Plaintiff’s employment in July 2019.

44. On or around July 30, 2019, APPETITES terminated AREVALO’s employment

because of Plaintiff’s sex/gender, female, in violation of F.S. §760.10(1).

45. A motivating factor behind APPETITES’ termination of AREVALO’s 

employment in July 2019 was Plaintiff’s sex/gender, female, in violation of §760.10(1).

Case 0:20-cv-61345-XXXX Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 07/06/2020 Page 8 of 15
9

46. APPETITES’ violations of §760.10(1)(a) were intentional and were done with 

malice and reckless disregard for AREVALO’s rights as guaranteed under the laws of the State 

of Florida, such that AREVALO is entitled to punitive damages against APPETITES pursuant to 

F.S. §760.11(5).

47. AREVALO has suffered lost earnings, emotional distress, loss of self-esteem, and 

other damages as a direct result of APPETITES’ violations of F.S. §760.10(1).

48. Pursuant to F.S. §760.11(5), AREVALO is entitled to recover her reasonable 

attorneys’ fees and costs from APPETITES as a result of Defendant’s violations of the FCRA. 

WHEREFORE, Plaintiff, DIANA AREVALO, demands judgment against Defendant, 

APPETITES, INC., for back pay, employment benefits, other compensation including bonuses, 

compensatory damages, including, but not limited to, damages for mental anguish, loss of 

dignity, and any other intangible injuries, equitable relief, interest, costs, attorney’s fees, expert 

fees and such other and further relief as this Honorable Court deems proper.

COUNT IV

RETALIATION IN VIOLATION OF THE FLORIDA CIVIL RIGHTS ACT, F.S. §760.10

Plaintiff, DIANA AREVALO, reasserts and reaffirms the allegations set forth in 

paragraphs 1 through 20 above and further states that this is an action against APPETITES, INC.

for Retaliation in violation of the Florida Civil Rights Act, F.S. §760.10. 

49. Pursuant to F.S. §760.10(7), it is “an unlawful employment practice for an 

employer ... to discriminate against any person because that person has opposed any practice 

which is an unlawful employment practice under this section, or because that person has made a 

charge, testified, assisted, or participated in any manner in an investigation, proceeding, or 

hearing under this section.”

Case 0:20-cv-61345-XXXX Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 07/06/2020 Page 9 of 15
10

50. At all times material to this action, APPETITES was an employer within the 

meaning of F.S. §760.02(7).

51. At all times material to this action, AREVALO was an employee of APPETITES

within the meaning of F.S. §760.10(1)(a).

52. At all times material to this action, AREVALO has been an aggrieved person 

within the meaning of F.S. §760.02(10).

53. When AREVALO objected to Steve Moscovitch on July 30, 2019 discriminating 

against Plaintiff because of her sex/gender, female, AREVALO engaged in protected activity 

within the meaning of F.S. §760.10(7).

54. AREVALO reasonably and in good faith believed that Moscovitch’s derogatory 

and demeaning statements about male employees being superior to Plaintiff, a female employee, 

were unlawful employment practices.

55. APPETITES intentionally retaliated against AREVALO on or around July 30, 

2019 when, following AREVALO’s objections to Moscovitch’s discriminatory statements about 

her being inferior to male employees, Defendant terminated AREVALO’s employment, in 

violation of F.S. §760.10(7).

56. The fact that AREVALO engaged in activity protected by the Florida Civil Rights 

Act was a motivating factor in APPETITES’ termination of Plaintiff’s employment on or around 

July 30, 2019, in violation of the FCRA, F.S. §760.10(7).

57. APPETITES’ termination of AREVALO’s employment on or around July 30, 

2019 just moments after AREVALO objected directly to Moscovitch’s derogatory and 

demeaning statements about male employees being superior to Plaintiff, a female employee, was 

Case 0:20-cv-61345-XXXX Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 07/06/2020 Page 10 of 15
11

unlawful retaliation in violation of F.S. §760.10(7) because of Plaintiff’s good faith objections to 

APPETITES’ gender discrimination.

58. APPETITES’ violations of §760.10 were intentional and were done with malice 

and reckless disregard for AREVALO’s rights as guaranteed under the laws of the State of 

Florida through the Florida Civil Rights Act, such that AREVALO is entitled to punitive 

damages against AREVALO pursuant to F.S. §760.11(5).

59. AREVALO has suffered lost earnings, emotional distress, loss of self-esteem and 

other injuries as a direct result of APPETITES’ violations of F.S. §760.10(7).

60. Pursuant to F.S. §760.11(5), AREVALO is entitled to recover her reasonable 

attorneys’ fees and costs from APPETITES as a result of Defendant’s violations of the FCRA.

WHEREFORE, Plaintiff, DIANA AREVALO, demands judgment against Defendant, 

APPETITES, INC., for back pay, employment benefits, other compensation including bonuses, 

compensatory damages, equitable relief including but not limited to front pay, injunctive relief, 

interest, attorney’s fees, costs, expert fees and such other and further relief as this Honorable 

Court deems proper.

JURY TRIAL DEMAND

DIANA AREVALO demands trial by jury on all issues so triable.

Dated: July 6, 2020 Respectfully submitted,

By: s/KEITH M. STERN

Keith M. Stern, Esquire

Florida Bar No. 321000

E-mail: employlaw@keithstern.com

LAW OFFICE OF KEITH M. STERN, P.A.

80 S.W. 8th Street, Suite 2000

Miami, Florida 33130

Telephone: (305) 901-1379

Facsimile: (561) 288-9031

Attorneys for Plaintiff

Case 0:20-cv-61345-XXXX Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 07/06/2020 Page 11 of 15
EXHIBIT A

Case 0:20-cv-61345-XXXX Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 07/06/2020 Page 12 of 15
CHARGE OF DISCRIMINATION AGENCY CHARGE NUMl3ER 

Th"' fo ·m .. "'ttc:cl<'d by tho! Pn.,.aq Act ur l'P-! �c� Pri...,acy Act Su1:cmcnt befor� complc-un.: 1il1,r� form [:JFEPA 

[}J EEOC 

Florida Commission on Human Relations and EEOC. 

Stare or local Agency, if wiy I S.S. No. I 771-46-965:?. 

:-iA\1E/lndicate Mr., Ms., Mrs.) HOME TELEPHOJl.:E (Include Area Code} 

Diana Arevalo (954) 864-53 53

STREET /\!)DRFSS CITY, STATF AND ZIP CODE I DATE OF BfRTII 

5830 Grant. trcct Hollywood, Florida 33021 2/26/1983 

NAMED lS THE EMPLOYER, LA.BOR ORGA�[ZATlO'-, EMPLOYME. T AGENCY, APPRENTICESHIP COMMrnEE; STATE OR LOCALGOVER::--:ML T 

AGENCY WJIO DlSCR�Ul\ATED AGA. 'ST ME flf more than one list below.) 

NA\.11: NLMBER OF E'\!PLOYFES, �E!\,IBERS TELEPHONE {Include Area Code) 

t\ppctitl!S, Inc. l 5-"- (954) 989-9480

"'TRI.ET DDRESS CITY, STATE A:-D ZIP CODE I cou:-:TY 

3420 W. Hallandale Beach Blvd. Pembroke Park, Florida 33023 Broward 

"!\\1 l. TELEPHONE NUMJ.lER (lncludP Area Code) 

STRFFT ,\DDRESS CITY. STATE A�D ZIP CODE I COU!-,;TY

C\l:<;t' OF DISCRL\1P.\/\TIO, J:-lASED ON (Check appropriate box(es)/ DATE DlSCRL\1lNATlON l'OOK PL.\CE 

EARLfEST (ADF:A/ EPA} LA TEST {ALL) 

RACE D COLOR [x]sEx [:J RELIGION DAGE 7/30;! 9 

w RETALlATlON D NATIONAL

ORIGlN 

D DISAB!!.JTY D OTl!r:R (Specify} 

Oco TNUING ACTION 

I HE PARTICULAR. /\RE (Tf additional paper is needed, attach extra sheet:{s)): 

I started working for Respondent as a Delivery Driver in October 2018. On or around July 25, 2019, I injured my left on the 

job while working for Respondent. After my injury at work, I notified Respondent's owner, Steve Moscovitch, I would be 

absent from work for a few days because of the doctor's orders regarding my injury. On or around July 30, 2019, I went to 

Respondent's office to talk to Respondent about a leave form and Steve Moscovitch told me that he had a male employee 

doing my job while I had been out of work and Mr. Moscovitch said the male employee did the job faster than me. Further, 

Steve Moscovitch advised me that I would need to complete deliveries and other work for Respondent as quickly as the 

male employee and when I objected to Mr. Moscovitch discriminating against me because of my sex/gender, female, Mr. 

Moscovitch told me that a male employee can do the job better than I could anyway and Mr. Moscovitch fired me. 

I believe Respondent subjected me to discrimination and disparate treatment based upon my sex/gender, female, and I 

believe Respondent retaliated against me because I objected to sex/gender discrimination, all in violation of Title VII of the 

Civil Rights Act and the Florida Civil Rights Act. 

I "ant tlus charge iilcd with both th· EEOC and the State or local Agency, 1f 

any !will advise the agencies 1flchange my address or telephone number 

Jnd I" ill coo crate fully "1th them m the proc,•ss mg of my charge

, 

m 

a,cordan, • \\ tth their r.rocedures. 

I declare under penalty of perjury that the foregoing ,s 1rue and correct. 

Da:ea9 -2,-:::,- \ C\ Chnrgmg Perry [.S'!}IUllllfC!}�� 

l:EOC FORMS (Te,: 10'44) 

NOTARY - (When necessary for State and Local Requ:rcmants) 

I swear or atlirm that I have read the abo-ve charge and that it is true 10 

the best ofmy knowledge, mfonnalion and belief. 

SIG:--.1/\TURE OF COMPLAINANT Received 

' 

SUBSCRJBEDA:-1D SWORN TO BEF<Sff>Eill' �nl9 (Day. month, a:id year) - L 

PQl'f" 1.r·, ,_ · l"\: .•.. 

.. .,, .... _ ...... . - . ..,,, ____ .., 
EXHIBIT B

Case 0:20-cv-61345-XXXX Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 07/06/2020 Page 14 of 15
Case 0:20-cv-61345-XXXX Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 07/06/2020 Page 15 of 15