Apuzza v. NYU Langone Long Island, 24-493-cv

Adrienne Apuzza worked as a medical technologist at NYU Langone Long Island.
In 2021, Langone implemented a policy requiring all employees to receive the COVID-19 vaccine, with noncompliance resulting in termination.
Apuzza opposed the vaccine mandate, contacted HR, sent a notice of discrimination, and ultimately refused vaccination, leading to her termination on October 1, 2021.
She filed suit pro se, alleging violations of the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) for discrimination, retaliation, and breaches of medical privacy.
The District Court dismissed her amended complaint for failure to state a claim, and Apuzza appealed.
The Second Circuit reviewed the dismissal de novo and affirmed, relying heavily on its recent decision in Sharikov v. Philips Medical Systems MR, Inc.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
ADA Discrimination	Langone "regarded" her as disabled and made a record of disability by policy	Policy applied to all employees; not based on disability	Policy not disability-based under ADA per Sharikov
ADA Retaliation	Termination was retaliation for protesting the vaccine mandate	Termination solely for refusal to comply with mandate	No causal link to protected activity per Sharikov
Medical Privacy	Subjected to impermissible medical inquiries/exams under ADA	No applicable ADA "regarded as disabled" theory applies	Medical privacy claim fails absent disability under ADA

Sharikov v. Philips Medical Systems MR, Inc., 103 F.4th 159 (2d Cir. 2024) (holding COVID-19 vaccine requirements for all employees do not amount to ADA disability discrimination or retaliation)
74 Pinehurst LLC v. New York, 59 F.4th 557 (2d Cir. 2023) (review standard for dismissals; de novo, in favor of non-moving party)
Kravitz v. Purcell, 87 F.4th 111 (2d Cir. 2023) (liberal construction of pro se submissions)