COMPLAINT

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE _______ DISTRICT OF ____

_________ DIVISION

ANGEL LAUZARA,                                   Plaintiff     vs.  STEVEN GROMAN,                                 Defendant   Case No. ______________ Honorable: _____________

COMPLAINT

  1. COMES NOW Plaintiff ANGEL LAUZARA, with this complaint against the Defendant STEVEN GROMAN, as follows:  

PARTIES

  • Complainant, ANGEL LAUZARA, is an individual of address [ENTER ADDRESS].
  • Defendant, STEVEN GROMAN is is an individual of address [ENTER ADDRESS].

JURISDICITON AND VENUE

  • This court has federal question jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C § 1331 since it involves the violations of federal law. Plaintiff brings the suit under 18 U.S.C § 241.  
  • Venue is proper in this district under 28 U.S.C. § 1391 as Plaintiff and/or Defendant is subject to personal jurisdiction in this state. Plaintiff and/or Defendant lives within the jurisdiction of this Court. Besides, a substantial part of the acts and omissions forming the basis of these claims occurred in the District of California and arose from the actions or inactions of the Defendants.

FACTS

  • On or about July 17, 2020, Plaintiff filed a Complaint through the OSHA.gov webpage against his employer alleging retaliation against him/her after Plaintiff found health and safety issues, which the employer had failed to respond to for 407 days.
  • By August 14, 2020, Plaintiff had not received any communication from OSHA. Plaintiff therefore called the Pittsburgh office to seek for an update of the case. Plaintiff was informed that his Complaint was not in the system. Accordingly, Plaintiff had to submit the Complaint again.
  • On or about September 19, 2020, Defendant tried interviewing Plaintiff. However, the interview could not proceed since Defendant claimed that he could not get Plaintiff. Consequently, Defendant asked Plaintiff to record a statement, which Plaintiff sent.
  • Consequently, Defendant and Plaintiff had interviews consecutively on September 23, 24 and 25. In the said interview, Defendant was dismissive of Plaintiff’s allegations. He cut Plaintiff short as he/she was explaining his case. For instance, he stated that he did not want to hear anything “that happened on another country or dates more than two years”. It is worth noting that Plaintiff needed to provide a background to his allegations, so that he may be able to establish his case.  
  •  

CLAIMS FOR RELIEF

COUNT 1

PRAYER FOR RELIEF

WHEREFORE, the Plaintiff is entitled to damages from the Defendant, and he hereby prays that judgment be entered in his favor and against the Defendant as follows:

Complainant seeks the following remedies:

Respectfully submitted:



 ______________________________ ANGEL LAUZARA ENTER ADDRESS Pro se

Dated: __________

CERTIFICATE OF MAILING

I, [ENTER NAME], certified on this ______day of ________ 2021, I deposited a true copy of the above to the Defendants by placing the documents with prepaid postage in the United States mailbox address.

 ______________________________ ANGEL LAUZARA ENTER ADDRESS Pro se

At Legal writing experts, we would be happy to assist in preparing any legal document you need. We are international lawyers and attorneys with significant experience in legal drafting, Commercial-Corporate practice and consulting. In the last few years, we have successfully undertaken similar assignments for clients from different jurisdictions. If given this opportunity, The LegalPen will be able to prepare the legal document within the shortest time possible. You can send us your quick enquiry ( here )