UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA ) Ruifang Hu, ) ) Plaintiff, ) ) v. ) Civil Action No. 18-cv-1240 (TSC) ) K4 Solutions, Inc., and RightDirection ) Technology Solutions LLC, ) ) Defendants. ) ) MEMORANDUM OPINION Plaintiff Ruifang Hu has sued her former employers, K4 Solutions, Inc. (“K4”) and RightDirection Technology Solutions LLC (“RDTS”), alleging violations of numerous federal and D.C. employment laws. Defendants jointly move to dismiss the Amended Complaint for failure to state a claim under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b)(6). (ECF No. 13 (“Def. Br.”).) RDTS separately moves to dismiss under Rule 12(b)(6) on the ground that it was not Hu’s joint employer. (ECF No. 17 (“RDTS Br.”).) Hu brings eight claims against both Defendants: wrongful discharge in violation of D.C. public policy (Count I); race discrimination and retaliation in violation of 42 U.S.C. § 1981 (Counts V and VI); sex, race, and national origin discrimination and retaliation in violation of the District of Columbia Human Rights Act, D.C. Code § 2-1402.11 (“DCHRA”) (Count VII); violation of the Equal Pay Act, 29 U.S.C. § 206(d)(1) et seq. (Count VIII); defamation (Count IX); violation of the Fair Labor Standards Act, 29 U.S.C. § 201 et seq. (“FLSA”) (Count X), and; violation of the D.C. Accrued Sick and Safe Leave Act, D.C. Code § 32-531-02 (“D.C. Leave Act”) (Count XI). Hu also brings three claims against K4 alone: race, sex, and national origin discrimination, hostile work environment, and retaliation in violation of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, as amended, 42 U.S.C. § 2000e et seq. (“Title VII”) (Counts II, III, and IV). Having reviewed the parties’ submissions, the court will DENY in part and GRANT in part Defendants’ motion to dismiss and DENY RDTS’s motion to dismiss. I. BACKGROUND The U.S. Customs and Border Protection (“CBP”) administers an Electronic Visa Update System Call Center (“Call Center”) for certain visa holders to manage their biographic information. (ECF No. 10 (“Am. Compl.”) ¶¶ 7–8.) CBP contracted with K4 and RDTS to manage the Call Center. (Id. ¶¶ 5–8.) Hu, a woman of Chinese descent and national origin, worked as a customer service representative at the Call Center from August 2016 until March 2017. (Id. ¶ 4.) Hu claims she was an exemplary employee during her short tenure at the Call Center, and K4 gave her a certificate of appreciation for her performance. (Id. ¶¶ 18–20.) While K4 hired Hu, both K4 and RDTS managed the Call Center and supervised her. (Id. ¶¶ 4, 9.) Shortly after she began work at the Call Center, Hu interviewed for a supervisor position. (Id. ¶¶ 11–12.) Her interviewer told her she was the best candidate and congratulated her on being offered the position. (Id. ¶ 13.) That offer, however, was “immediately revoked” by K4’s Vice President, Marlene Duvall, because Hu “failed to speak more like an American.” (Id. ¶ 13.) Duvall later purportedly told others she “preferred a white male” for the position. (Id.) K4 ...
Original document
Source: All recent Immigration Decisions In All the U.S. Courts of Appeals