HARAKAL

v.

COMPOSITE MOTORS, INC.

Defendant. /

ORDER GRANTING DEFENDANT’S “MOTION TO DISMISS COMPLAINT”

This matter is before the Court on Defendant Composite Motors, Inc.’s “Motion to Dismiss Complaint,” filed October 21, 2022. (Doc. 11). Plaintiff Cindy Harakal filed her response in opposition on November 17, 2022. (Doc. 15). Upon review of the motion, response, court file, and record, the Court finds as follows: Background Plaintiff Cindy Harakal, a sixty-year-old woman, was employed by Defendant Composite Motors, Inc. from April 2016 until November 18, 2021. She was hired as a front desk receptionist but later trained and began working as a human resources generalist in or around May 2021. On November 8, 2021, Defendant notified Plaintiff that one of her coworkers had tested positive for COVID-19 and sent her home to test for the virus. A few days later, Plaintiff received notification that she had tested positive for COVID-19. After she notified her supervisor, Plaintiff was instructed to quarantine until November 22, 2021, per protocols issued by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. On November 18, 2021, Plaintiff received a phone call informing her that her position had been terminated, but she was not given a reason for the termination. On September 22, 2022, Plaintiff filed suit against Defendant, asserting claims for disability discrimination under the Americans with Disabilities Act (“ADA”) (Count I), age discrimination under the Age Discrimination in Employment Act (“ADEA”) (Count II), retaliation under the Family and Medical Leave Act (“FMLA”) (Count III), disability discrimination under the Florida Civil Rights Act (“FCRA”) (Count IV), and age discrimination under the FCRA (Count V).¹ Defendant seeks dismissal of all claims, arguing that Plaintiff has failed to state any facially sufficient claims.2 “Disability and age-related discrimination actions under the FCRA are analyzed under the same frameworks as the ADA and ADEA,

respectively.” Mazzeo v. Color Resols. Int'l, LLC, 746 F. 3d 1264, 1266 (11th Cir. 2014) (citing Chanda v. Engelhard/ICC, 234 F. 3d 1219, 1221 (11th Cir. 2000); Zaben v. Air Prods. & Chems., Inc., 129 F. 3d 1453, 1455 n.2 (11th Cir. 1997)). Legal Standard Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 8(a) requires that a complaint contain “a short and plain statement of the claim showing the [plaintiff] is entitled to relief.” Fed. R. Civ. P. 8(a). While Rule 8(a) does not demand “detailed factual allegations,” it does

538 F. Supp. 3d 1344, 1348 (M.D. Ga. 2021) (“The Court has little trouble disagreeing with [the plaintiff’s] legally-flawed position that anyone alleged to have COVID-19 is ‘disabled’ as that term is defined by the ADA.”); McCone, 2022 WL 801772, at *4 (explaining that “being infected with COVID-19, standing alone, does not meet the ADA’s definitions of disability or impairment”). After all, although some people diagnosed with COVID-19 may suffer from severe symptoms that impact major life activities, many people exhibit no symptoms at all, or minimal symptoms akin to the common cold. If Plaintiff is proceeding with an actual disability claim, in her amended complaint, she should include additional facts to generally describe her symptoms and explain how COVID-19 substantially limited a major life activity. Although an intricate description of Plaintiff’s condition is not necessary, failing to allege a single symptom falls short of pleading standards. See Champion, 538 F. Supp. 3d at 1348. FMLA Retaliation Claim (III) Defendant contends that Plaintiff has failed to state an FMLA retaliation claim because she never notified her employer of her desire to apply for FMLA leave and failed to allege a qualifying serious health condition. The complaint generally alleges that Plaintiff exercised her right to take FMLA leave, and Defendant knew but terminated her anyway. But in opposition to the motion to dismiss, Plaintiff appears to acknowledge that she did not actually apply for FMLA leave – rather, she intended to, and Defendant should have known her intent based on her COVID-19 diagnosis. “A plaintiff bringing an FMLA retaliation claim must show that [her] employer intentionally discriminated against [her] in the form of an adverse employment action for having exercised an FMLA right.” Tanner v. Stryker Corp. of Michigan, No. 8:21-

cv-2293-VMC-TGW, 2022 WL 17338859, at *6 (M.D. Fla. Nov. 30, 2022) (quoting Bradley v. Army Fleet Support, LLC, 54 F. Supp. 3d 1272, 1282 (M.D. Ala. 2014)). Although the complaint alleges that Plaintiff engaged in statutorily protected activity by exercising her right to take FMLA leave (Doc. 1 at ¶¶ 53; 56-57), the response in opposition indicates that Plaintiff had not submitted any FMLA paperwork while arguing that her employer was instead “fully aware” of her need to quarantine based on her positive COVID-19 test. Due to this conflict, the Court will dismiss this claim with leave to amend, if Plaintiff may do so in good faith.³ Defendant additionally argues that this claim is subject to dismissal because Plaintiff fails to identify a serious health condition that would make her eligible for

FMLA leave. The Court agrees. As the Court explained in its analysis of the disability discrimination claims, the complaint does not identify or describe any of Plaintiff’s symptoms. As such, she has not pled sufficient facts to establish a serious health condition under the FMLA. If Plaintiff chooses to amend this claim, she should at least generally describe her symptoms. Age Discrimination Claims (Counts II and V)

Defendant argues that Plaintiff has failed to state her age discrimination claims by not including plausible factual allegations that she was discriminated against because of her age. A plaintiff does not need to plead a prima facie case for job discrimination to survive a motion to dismiss. See Buchanan v. Delta Air Lines, Inc., 727 F. App’x 639, 642 (11th Cir. 2018) (citing Swierkiewicz v. Sorema N.A., 534 U.S. 506, 515 (2002)). Rather, a plaintiff must simply allege facts “adequate to raise her right to relief above a speculative level.” Id.

FY PBS

-TOMBARBER =—<“i—i‘“‘C;C:™

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE