Khademi v. AANIKA Biosciences, Inc.
1:24-cv-05130
| E.D.N.Y | Jun 28, 2025Background
- Plaintiff, Farshad Khademi, was employed by AANIKA Biosciences as a lead fermentation scientist and claims he was directed, due to his gender and physical stature, to move a 200-lb machine, resulting in serious injury and subsequent disability.
- After reporting his injuries and requesting accommodation (use of PTO for medical appointments), Khademi was terminated shortly after making accommodation requests and submitting a physician's letter.
- Plaintiff alleges discrimination and retaliation based on disability (under ADA, NYSHRL, and NYCHRL), as well as sex/gender discrimination and failure to engage in an interactive process under state and city law.
- Defendants moved to dismiss on all claims, asserting failure to plausibly plead discrimination, retaliation, or protected activity as required by relevant laws.
- The court applies the federal Rule 12(b)(6) standard (Iqbal/Twombly) and separately considers ADA, NYSHRL, and NYCHRL claims under their respective frameworks.
- Court partially grants and partially denies dismissal—some claims survive as plausible, others are dismissed as insufficiently pleaded.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| ADA Disability Discrimination | Termination was because of disability and requests for medical accommodations | No plausible facts show termination was because of disability | Denied: Plaintiff plausibly alleges termination because of disability |
| ADA Retaliation | Retaliated against due to protected activity regarding accommodation requests | Accommodation requests and related actions not protected; no causal link | Denied: Plaintiff plausibly alleges protected activity and causal connection |
| NYSHRL Disability Discrimination | Same facts as above, applies broader standard | Same as above, fails for all defendants | Denied as to AANIKA and Bhuyan (individual), granted as to Jorgensen (insufficient link to adverse action) |
| NYSHRL Sex Discrimination | Directed to move machine due to being male; treated less well | Isolated instance; no facts showing gender-based motive or comparators | Granted: Allegations are conclusory and insufficient |
| NYSHRL Retaliation | Retaliated against for requesting accommodation, complaining | Accommodation requests not protected activity under NYSHRL | Granted: No protected activity pleaded |
| NYCHRL Disability Discrimination | Termination motivated by disability; broader standard applies | No plausible claim against Jorgensen individually | Denied as to AANIKA and Bhuyan, granted as to Jorgensen |
| NYCHRL Sex, Height, Weight Discrimination | Directed to move equipment due to gender/physical traits | Isolated, not specifically discriminatory | Granted: Insufficient factual support |
| NYCHRL Retaliation | Protected activity includes accommodation requests | No plausible protected activity | Denied: Protected activity/casual link plausibly pled |
| NYCHRL Failure to Engage (Interactive Process) | No dialogue over accommodation | No standalone cause of action | Granted: No separate claim under NYCHRL |
Key Cases Cited
- Ashcroft v. Iqbal, 556 U.S. 662 (Supreme Court set the pleading standard for plausibility).
- Bell Atl. Corp. v. Twombly, 550 U.S. 544 (Supreme Court introduces plausibility standard).
- Littlejohn v. City of New York, 795 F.3d 297 (Second Circuit on minimal inference of discriminatory motivation in pleadings).
- Swierkiewicz v. Sorema N.A., 534 U.S. 506 (prima facie case not required at pleading stage).
- Vega v. Hempstead Union Free Sch. Dist., 801 F.3d 72 (minimal burden for inference of discrimination at pleading stage).
- Parker v. Columbia Pictures Indus., 204 F.3d 326 (discrimination can be one of several motivating factors).
- Kinneary v. City of New York, 601 F.3d 151 (Second Circuit on NYCHRL claims tracking ADA elements).
- Feingold v. New York, 366 F.3d 138 (individual liability under NYSHRL for aiding/abetting discrimination).
- Menaker v. Hofstra Univ., 935 F.3d 20 (Second Circuit standard for sex discrimination claims).
- Loeffler v. Staten Island Univ. Hosp., 582 F.3d 268 (NYCHRL requires only showing of less well treatment due to discriminatory intent).