Cadigan v. Align Tech.

JILL A.R. CADIGAN, Plaintiff, v. ALIGN TECHNOLOGY, INC. and LANCE JOHNSON, Defendants.

Civil Action No. 1:19-cv-11462-ADB

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF MASSACHUSETTS

July 7, 2020

MEMORANDUM AND ORDER ON DEFENDANTS' MOTION TO DISMISS

BURROUGHS, D.J.

On April 25, 2019, Plaintiff Jill Cadigan ("Plaintiff") filed a complaint in Plymouth County Superior Court alleging that Align Technology, Inc. ("Align") and her supervisor, Lance Johnson ("Johnson" and, collectively, "Defendants") discriminated against her on the basis of gender and age (Counts I and II), retaliated against her and subjected her to a retaliatory work environment (Counts III and VI), and subjected her to a hostile work environment on the basis of her gender and age (Counts IV and V). [ECF No. 16 ("Amended Complaint" or "Am. Compl.") ¶¶ 96-143]. On July 3, 2019, Align removed the case to federal court. [ECF No. 1].

Presently before the Court is Defendants' motion to dismiss Plaintiff's First Amended Complaint. [ECF No. 17]. For the reasons set forth below, the motion to dismiss, [ECF No. 17], is DENIED.

I. BACKGROUND

A. Factual Allegations

The following facts are drawn from the first amended complaint, [Am. Compl.], the well-pleaded allegations of which are taken as true for the purpose of evaluating the motion, see Ruvio v. Wells Fargo Bank, N.A., 766 F.3d 87, 90 (1st Cir. 2014).

Align is a "global medical device company" that is headquartered in Santa Clara, California. [Am. Compl. ¶ 5]. Plaintiff was hired by Align as a "Territory Manager" in January 2000. [Id. ¶ 6]. Johnson was Plaintiff's direct manager between November 2007 and January 2015. [Id. ¶ 8]. Johnson "made disparaging statements about Plaintiff being a working mother, [including] questioning whether it was even appropriate for her to work at all, and even asking a colleague: 'Doesn't her husband work?'" [Id. ¶ 10]. For example, Johnson "expressed incredulity" when Plaintiff told him that "she was involved in her children's school activities and other domestic activities consistent with the traditional role of married women," [id. ¶ 11], and "disparaged Plaintiff" for not socializing with her coworkers "because she did not like to play golf or stay out after hours and drink," [id. ¶ 12].

In January 2014, Johnson "placed [Plaintiff] on a performance plan when her performance was objectively similar and even superior to that of [male employees] not placed on plans." [Id. ¶ 27]. Plaintiff, believing that the tactic was motivated by a desire to force out female employees who were over the age of forty, [id. ¶ 28], contacted Align's Director of Human Resources (the "HR Director") to initiate an internal discrimination charge and to challenge the performance plan, [id. ¶¶ 41, 42]. The HR Director assured Plaintiff that Align's policy required that her charge be kept confidential and that any reprisals or retaliation for her making the charge would violate Align's policy and the law. [Id. ¶¶ 42-43]. Plaintiff told theHR Director that "she was concerned [Johnson] had unfairly evaluated her work in comparison to [male] team members" out of a desire to get rid of her. [Id. ¶ 46]. The HR Director said that Johnson maintained that she was "at the bottom of every performance 'metric,'" but allowed Plaintiff to provide data to show that Johnson's assertions were false. [Id. ¶ 47].

In January 2014, Plaintiff prepared a twelve-page letter (the "Internal Complaint") citing numerous statistics measuring her performance against similarly situated territory managers, which she believed established that Johnson had unfairly evaluated her work, [id. ¶ 48], and supported her contention that she was receiving disparate treatment because she was the only female employee in her sales region, [ECF No. 16-1 at 6]. The Internal Complaint compared Plaintiff to two men on her team, Jim Fasino ("Fasino") and Michael Anistasi ("Anistasi"), among others. [Id.; Am. Compl. ¶ 49]. On January 12, 2014, Plaintiff emailed the Internal Complaint to both the HR Director and Align's Executive Team. [Am. Compl. ¶ 50].

On January 17, 2014, at Align's annual sales meeting in Boca Raton, Florida, "Plaintiff told [the HR Director] that she believed that [Johnson's] mistreatment of her was fueled by gender-based and age-based animus," citing previous examples of Johnson's discrimination. [Id. ¶ 51]. Plaintiff told the HR Director that "Johnson's hostility toward her intensified when she turned [forty-nine]." [Id. ¶ 52]. Align's CEO joined the conversation and informed Plaintiff that he had read the Internal Complaint, but "could not comment on it . . . [and] hoped it would be rectified . . . ." [Id.]. The CEO further stated to Plaintiff, "You've been an important part of this company for a long time," and, "I hope we can all put this behind us." [Id.]. The HR Director "promised to investigate [the] charges" and reiterated that it "would remain confidential . . . ." [Id. ¶ 53].

Three weeks later, when Plaintiff asked Johnson about her performance plan, he said, "that little report you wrote made that go away." [Am. Compl. ¶ 54]. In addition to knowing about the Internal Complaint, Johnson also disclosed it to Anistasi, one of the male coworkers whom Plaintiff had referenced as a comparison, [id. ¶¶ 49, 79], and encouraged Anistasi to treat Plaintiff poorly, [id. ¶¶ 75, 76, 79]. In May 2014, Anistasi "began expressing hostility toward [Plaintiff]," [id. ¶ 55], including failing to return her phone calls for several weeks and shunning her at both a business dinner and a company meeting, despite Plaintiff's repeated attempts to determine why he was upset with her, [id. ¶¶ 56-57]. In August 2014, Anistasi told Plaintiff, "I was a loyal friend to you, you are all out for yourself, and I can't share why I am upset, because someone will get fired. So I won't discuss it with you." [Id. ¶ 57]. He also told her to "[t]hink about what [she] did." [Id. ¶ 59]. Plaintiff asked another employee, Fasino, if he knew why Anistasi was upset. [Id. ¶ 60]. Fasino said that, though he knew, he "could not tell her because revealing [that information] would subject another employee to discipline." [Id.]. Fasino told Plaintiff that he was not upset with her and encouraged her "to work out the problem with [Anistasi]." [Id.].

When Plaintiff once again tried to address the issue with Anistasi, he made disparaging comments about her work and told her that the rest of the sales team had discussed the issue and agreed that her work was inadequate. [Am. Compl. ¶¶ 61-63]. He then told Plaintiff to apologize to the team, which she did. [Id. ¶ 63]. When she called to apologize, her fellow team members "expressed puzzlement . . . ." [Id.]. Additionally, Anistasi claimed that some of the doctors with whom Plaintiff worked did not like her and talked about her behind her back. [Id. ¶ 64 (claiming that Anistasi told Plaintiff, "[e]ven people you think like you don't," "[y]ou'd be shocked to find out who doesn't like you," and, "[t]hey . . . are people with whom you consideryourself to have good relationships")]. Anistasi also falsely asserted that a customer hated Plaintiff, and sarcastically thanked her for her performance. [Id. ¶¶ 66-67].

In 2015, Johnson assigned Plaintiff and Anistasi a joint project, knowing that the assignment "would subject Plaintiff to extreme hostility from [Anistasi]." [Am. Compl. ¶ 77]. When Plaintiff requested that she be reassigned, Johnson declined. [Id.]. Johnson repeatedly asked Plaintiff if she was aware of why Anistasi would refuse to work with her and was incredulous when she said that she did not. [Id. ¶ 78]. Anistasi continued to refuse to work with Plaintiff and insisted that they complete their assignment separately. [Id.].

In May 2016, Anistasi told Plaintiff that "she was good at her job, [but] she was a 'horrible person.'" [Am. Compl. ¶¶ 68-69]. Apparently referring to the Internal Complaint, Anistasi claimed that Plaintiff "wrote a report that threw [him] under the bus. Trying to save [her] own job, [she] put down everybody else!" [Id. ¶ 69]. Plaintiff told Anistasi that he should not have been aware of the Internal Complaint and asked if Johnson had disclosed it. [Id. ¶ 70]. Anistasi refused to answer. [Id.]. When Plaintiff explained that she had only talked about Anistasi's performance as a comparison to her own to demonstrate harassment, Anistasi claimed that she should have made the HR Director pull the statistics rather than "throwing all [of her] colleagues under the bus." [Id. ¶ 71]. Anistasi said that, because of the Internal Complaint, he could never trust Plaintiff and would never be her friend. [Id.]. He continued to treat her with hostility. [Id. ¶ 73].

Eventually, Johnson was replaced as Plaintiff's manager by Jeff Melville ("Melville"). [Am. Compl. ¶ 73]. Melville told Plaintiff that he would instruct Anistasi to stop his conduct, and "that bullying was not permitted for any reason." [Id. ¶ 74]. In June 2016, Anistasi sent Plaintiff a text message apologizing for his behavior. [Id.].

In September 2016, Plaintiff was once again put on a performance plan, this time by Align's Northeast Director of Sales, [Am. Compl. ¶ 80], because she had allegedly failed "to complete record keeping related templates in a sales-based software system," [id. ¶ 81]. Plaintiff had in fact "completed her recordkeeping responsibilities." [Id. ¶ 83]. Further, Plaintiff claims that the Director knew that "similarly situated employees had also not complied with the record keeping activities, and that within the company, compliance with the task was considered at most a minor, administrative responsibility" for which "non-compliance could not result in discipline." [Id. ¶ 82]. Plaintiff claims that she was put on the plan due to Align's ongoing animus toward female employees over the age of forty and in retaliation for her earlier Internal Complaint. [Id. ¶ 83]. Melville apologized for having to put Plaintiff on a performance...