Quantcast

PENNSYLVANIA RECORD

Thursday, April 18, 2024

Federal judge keeps former Bosch electrician's age discrimination case alive

Lawsuits
Judgeleesonfrompreviouspennrecordstory300x400

United States District Court Judge Joseph F. Leeson Jr.

PHILADELPHIA — A federal judge recently tossed part of a lawsuit filed by a former Bosch Security Systems electronic technician who claims he was fired because of his age.

U.S. District Court Judge Joseph Leeson Jr., on the bench in Pennsylvania's Eastern District, granted portions of a Bosch motion for a judgment on the pleadings, saying the company's former employee, Hung M. Nguyen, had failed to timely respond to the company's release agreement.  

"In this case, Nguyen has failed to respond to Bosch's release argument even though he had two opportunities to do so," Judge Leeson said in his six-page opinion and order issued Nov. 8. "This Court therefore grants Bosch's motion as unopposed with respect to Nguyen’s Pennsylvania Human Relations Act claim and grants judgment on the pleadings with respect to that claim."


Leeson left intact Nguyen's Age Discrimination in Employment Act (ADEA).

Nguyen filed his complaint this past April 20 alleging that he was notified of his termination on Dec. 5, 2013 and that his job subsequently was assigned to two younger employees. Nguyen, who was 54 at the time of his dismissal, alleges he suffered financial damages, mental anguish, emotional pain, emotional distress and damage to his reputation.

Bosch had argued that Nguyen's ADEA claim should also be dismissed under the act's exhaustion requirement. In Pennsylvania, a complaint under the ADEA must be filed within 300 days of the discriminatory act, but Nguyen did not file his initial charge until Dec. 16, 2014, more than a year after his termination notice.

Nguyen countered that his ADEA claim is not time barred because the alleged discrimination continued after Bosch terminated him while stating in its notice that his position was being eliminated later reassigning it to the younger employees.

Leeson disagreed, saying the 300-day limit began to run out the day Nguyen received the notice but that equitable tolling under the ADEA applied because Bosch's notice allegedly misled Nguyen about the future of his former position.

"Nguyen alleges Bosch told him that his position was being eliminated -- i.e. that Bosch actively misled him for the reason behind his termination -- and that he only recognized his potential discrimination claim later when he learned that his duties had been reassigned to younger employees," Leeson said in his order. "These allegations, taken as true and with all inferences drawn in Nguyen’s favor, activate the doctrine of equitable tolling."

Leeson said he would offer "no view as to whether equitable tolling will ultimately save Nguyen's ADEA claim" but that questions remain in the case. Those questions are about whether Bosch effectively misled Nguyen, whether Nguyen could reasonably have been misled, and whether Nguyen could have learned about the deception sooner.

"Regardless, Nguyen has alleged sufficient facts to invoke the applicability of the doctrine," Leeson said in his opinion and order.

More News