EGGER v. CERTARA USA, INC.
2:24-cv-05818
E.D. Pa.Mar 3, 2025Background
- Plaintiff Diane Egger, a Pennsylvania resident, sued her former employer, Certara USA, Inc., principally based in New Jersey, for sex discrimination and retaliation.
- The claims at issue (Counts V and VI) were brought under the New Jersey Law Against Discrimination (NJLAD).
- Plaintiff’s amended complaint did not allege that she worked in New Jersey, that her supervisors were in New Jersey, or that key decisions affecting her employment took place there.
- Defendant filed a motion to dismiss, arguing the lack of New Jersey employment nexus makes the NJLAD inapplicable.
- The court reviewed whether the complaint plausibly alleged facts sufficient to state a claim under the NJLAD, as required under Rule 12(b)(6).
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Applicability of NJLAD | Certara decisions originated in NJ | Egger not alleged to have worked in NJ | NJLAD claims dismissed for lack of nexus |
| Sufficiency of Allegations | Conclusory statement about NJ connection | No facts pled showing NJ connection | Allegations insufficient under 12(b)(6) |
| Relevance of Calabotta and Schulman | Out-of-state claims allowed in exceptions | Those cases factually distinct | Cases distinguishable from present facts |
| Dismissal With/Without Prejudice | Should survive or be amendable | Dismissed for inadequate facts | Dismissal without prejudice |
Key Cases Cited
- Zuber v. Boscov's, 871 F.3d 255 (3d Cir. 2017) (restates Twombly plausibility standard for pleading)
- Fowler v. UPMC Shadyside, 578 F.3d 203 (3d Cir. 2009) (articulates Rule 12(b)(6) standard and pleading requirements)
- Kost v. Kozakiewicz, 1 F.3d 176 (3d Cir. 1993) (requires sufficient factual allegations to outline claim's elements)