arrow left
arrow right
  • Lurline H Shaw v. Prime Now LlcTorts - Other (Employment Discrimination) document preview
  • Lurline H Shaw v. Prime Now LlcTorts - Other (Employment Discrimination) document preview
  • Lurline H Shaw v. Prime Now LlcTorts - Other (Employment Discrimination) document preview
  • Lurline H Shaw v. Prime Now LlcTorts - Other (Employment Discrimination) document preview
  • Lurline H Shaw v. Prime Now LlcTorts - Other (Employment Discrimination) document preview
  • Lurline H Shaw v. Prime Now LlcTorts - Other (Employment Discrimination) document preview
  • Lurline H Shaw v. Prime Now LlcTorts - Other (Employment Discrimination) document preview
  • Lurline H Shaw v. Prime Now LlcTorts - Other (Employment Discrimination) document preview
						
                                

Preview

INDEX NO. 531821/2023 NYSCEF DOC. NO. 3 RECEIVED NYSCEF 01/03/2024 SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK COUNTY OF KINGS LURLINE HERMINA SAMARTHA SHAW, Plaintiff, Vv, Index No. 531821/2023 PRIME NOW, LLC, ELECTRONICALLY FILED Defendant. NOTICE OF FILING OF REMOVAL TO FEDERAL COURT TO The Clerk of the Supreme Court of the State of New York, County of Kings, and Plaintiff Lurline Hermina Samartha Shaw, by and through her counsel, Hakan Sen of AKIN & SALAMAN, 45 Broadway, Suite 1420, New York, NY 10006. PLEASE TAKE NOTICE that on January 3, 2023, Defendant Prime Now LLC filed with the Clerk of the Court for the United States District Court for the Eastern District of New York a Notice of Removal of this action to the United States District Court for the Eastern District of New York. A true and correct copy of Amazon’s Notice of Removal and exhibits thereto are attached hereto as Exhibit 1. PLEASE TAKE FURTHER NOTICE that pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1446, the filing of the Notice of Removal with the United States District Court, together with the filing of the Notice of Filing of Removal with this court, effects the removal of this action, and this Court shall proceed no further unless and until the case has been remanded. Dated: January 3, 2024 MoraGaNn, LEwIs & Bockius LLP By: /s/ Ashley J. Hale Ashley J. Hale 101 Park Avenue New York, NY 10178 212-309-6878 ashley.hale@morganlewis.com Counsel for Defendant Prime Now LLC 1 of 71 INDEX NO. 531821/2023 NYSCEF DOC. NO. 3 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 01/03/2024 CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE The undersigned hereby certifies the foregoing Notice of Removal was served via U.S. Mail with postage prepaid and electronic mail on the following counsel of record on January 3, 2024: AKIN & SALAMAN Hakan Sen 45 Broadway, Suite 1420 New York, NY 10006 212-825-1400 hakan@akinlaws.com Counsel for Plaintiff Lurline Hermina Samartha Shaw /s/ Ashley J. Hale Ashley J. Hale NOTICE OF FILING OF REMOVAL TO FEDERAL COURT PAGE 2 2 of 71 TSE oe NOL ETTORE DRIVE PROTEGE INDEX NO. 531821/2023 ge 1 of Ig eppP tivdcer: 01/03/2024 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK LURLINE HERMINA SAMARTHA SHAW, Plaintiff, Vv, Case No. 24-cv-00061 PRIME NOW, LLC, Defendant. NOTICE OF REMOVAL Defendant Prime Now LLC (‘Prime Now”) hereby removes the action captioned Lurline Hermina Samartha Shaw v. Prime Now LLC, Index No. 531821/2023, from the Supreme Court of the State of New York, County of Kings (the “Action”), to the United States District Court for the Eastern District of New York, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §§ 1332, 1441, and 1446. This Action may be removed because the parties are diverse and the amount in controversy exceeds $75,000, exclusive of interest and costs. In support of removal, Prime Now states as follows: I PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND 1 On or about October 31, 2023, Plaintiff Lurline Hermina Samartha Shaw commenced the Action in the Supreme Court of the State of New York, County of Kings. In the Complaint, Plaintiff purports to assert six causes of action against Prime Now, including gender discrimination, hostile work environment, and retaliation under both the New York State Human Rights Law (“NYSHRL”) and the New York City Human Rights Law (“NYCHRL”). True and correct copies of all processes, pleadings, and orders filed in the Action and/or served on Amazon, including the Complaint and Summons, are attached as Exhibit A. 2. On November 20, 2023, Plaintiff served a copy of the Complaint and Summons on the New York Secretary of State. See Ex. A at 2. On December 4, 2023, Prime Now received a 3 of 71 TSE oe NOL ETTORE DRIVE PROTEGE INDEX NO. 531821/2023 ge 2 of Ig Reppp iivscer: 01/03/2024 copy of the Complaint and Summons when the New York Secretary of State sent it, via certified mail, to Corporation Service Company (“CSC”) Amazon’s Registered Agent in New York. See Ex. A at 1. 3. On December 19, 2023, Prime Now filed the parties’ joint Stipulation to Extend Time to Answer, Move, or Otherwise Plead, extending such deadline to January 19, 2023. See Ex. A at 20. There have been no further proceedings for the Action in the Supreme Court of the State of New York, County of Kings. See Ex. A at 21. 4. No previous Notice of Removal has been filed or made with this Court for the relief sought herein. IL. GROUNDS FOR REMOVAL 5. Section 1441(a) of Title 28 of the United States Code provides in relevant part that “any civil action brought in a State court of which the district courts of the United States have original jurisdiction, may be removed by the defendant or the defendants to the district court of the United States for the district and division embracing the place where such action is pending.” 28 U.S.C. § 1441(a). 6. Federal district courts have original jurisdiction of all civil actions where the matter in controversy exceeds the sum or value of $75,000, exclusive of interest and costs, and is between citizens of different states. See 28 U.S.C. § 1332. A, Complete Diversity of Citizenship Exists. 7. A defendant may remove a case to federal court based on diversity jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1332 only ifno defendant is a citizen of the state in which the action was brought or of the same state in which the plaintiff is a citizen. See 28 U.S.C. §§ 1441(a), (b). Here, all 4 of 71 TSE oe NOL ETTORE DRIVE PROTEGE INDEX NO. 531821/2023 ge 3 of Ig eppEp iivster: 01/03/2024 requirements are met because Plaintiff is a citizen of New York and Prime Now is a citizen of Delaware and Washington. 1 Plaintiff Shaw is a Citizen of New York. 8. Upon information and belief, Plaintiff is a resident and domiciliary of the State of New York. See Complaint, Exhibit A at 6, § 6 (“[a]t the time of filing this action, Plaintiff [Shaw] was and is a resident of Kings County in the State of New York.”). This accords with Prime Now’s personnel records for Plaintiff, which reflect that Plaintiffs last known address is in New York, that Plaintiff maintained a New York home address throughout her employment with Prime Now, and that Plaintiff paid taxes as a citizen of New York. See Ex. B, Decl. of U. Otuonye, at fj 6—7. According to Prime Now’s personnel records, Plaintiff began working at Prime Now as a Prime Now Associate on or around June 14, 2021 in Prime Now’s UNY1 facility, located in Brooklyn, Kings County, New York, and she remained employed with Prime Now in that role until the termination of her employment, effective May 18, 2023. See id. at 44 5, 8. 9. Plaintiff is an individual, and, therefore, is a citizen of New York for purposes of 28 U.S.C. § 1332. 2. Defendant Prime Now is a Citizen of Delaware and Washington. 10. Prime Now is a limited liability company. A limited liability company “takes the citizenship of each of its members.” Bayerische Landesbank, N.Y. Branch v. Aladdin Capital Mgmt. LLC, 692 F.3d 42, 49 (2d Cir. 2012). Prime Now was and is organized under the laws of the State of Delaware and maintains a principal place of business in Seattle, Washington, where its operational, executive, administrative, and policymaking decisions are made. See Ex. C, Decl. of Z. Brown, atJ 2. Specifically, Prime Now’s centralized administrative functions and operations 5 of 71 TSE oe NOL ETTORE DRIVE PROTEGE INDEX NO. ge 4 of Ig ReppEp iivscer: 01/03/2024 531821/2023 are based in Seattle, Washington, and it is the actual center of direction, control, and coordination for its operations. See id. 11. Prime Now’s sole member and owner is PNF Enterprises, LLC, which is a limited liability company organized under the laws of the State of Delaware and that maintains a principal place of business in Seattle, Washington, where its operational, executive, administrative, and policymaking decisions are made. See id. at | 3. PNF Enterprises LLC’s sole member is PNF Properties LLC, which is a limited liability company organized under the laws of the State of Delaware and that maintains a principal place of business in Seattle, Washington. See id. at § 4. PNF Properties LLC’s sole member is PNF US LLC, which is a limited liability company organized under the laws of the State of Delaware and that maintains a principal place of business in Seattle, Washington. See id. at 5. PNF US LLC’s sole member is Amazon.com Services LLC, which is a limited liability company organized under the laws of the State of Delaware and that maintains a principal place of business in Seattle, Washington. See id. at J 6. 12. Amazon.com Services LLC’s sole member is Amazon.com Sales, Inc. See id. at J 7. A corporation is “a citizen of every [s]tate [...] by which it has been incorporated and of the [s]tate [...] where it has its principal place of business.” 28 U.S.C. § 1332(c)(1). Amazon.com Sales, Inc. is incorporated under the laws of the State of Delaware, maintains a principal place of business in Seattle, Washington, and is a wholly owned subsidiary of parent company Amazon.com, Inc. See Ex. C at § 7. 13. Amazon.com, Inc. is incorporated under the laws of the State of Delaware and maintains a principal place of business in Seattle, Washington. See id. Amazon.com Sales, Inc. and Amazon.com, Inc. both maintain their corporate headquarters in Seattle Washington. See id. at § 8. Key executives of Amazon.com Sales, Inc. and Amazon.com, Inc. are based out of their 6 of 71 TSE oe NOL ETTORE DRIVE PROTEGE INDEX NO. 531821/2023 ge 5 of Ig Ceppep iivSter: 01/03/2024 respective Seattle, Washington corporate headquarters. See id. Seattle, Washington is also the actual center of direction, control, and coordination for their operations. See id. Amazon.com, Inc. is therefore a citizen of Delaware and Washington, and, accordingly, Prime Now is therefore a citizen of Delaware and Washington for purposes of diversity jurisdiction. 14. None of the aforementioned entities are incorporated under the laws of the State of New York, nor do any of them have a principal place of business in New York and no member or owner of Prime Now LLC is a citizen of New York. Based on the foregoing, the complete diversity of citizenship requirement is met. B The Amount in Controversy Exceeds $75,000, Exclusive of Interest and Costs. 15. Removal based on diversity of citizenship is proper if the amount in controversy exceeds $75,000. See 28 U.S.C. § 1332(a). Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1446(a), “a defendant’s notice of removal need include only a plausible allegation that the amount in controversy exceeds the jurisdictional threshold.” Dart Cherokee Basin Operating Co., LLC v. Owens, 574 U.S. 81, 89 (2014); Bracken v. MH Pillars Inc., 290 F.Supp.3d 258, 262 (S.D.N.Y. 2017) (a defendant must only show a “reasonable probability” that the amount in controversy exceeds $75,000). 16. Here, while Prime Now denies any and all liability to Plaintiff and that Plaintiff is entitled to the relief sought, a fair reading of Plaintiff's Complaint makes clear that the amount in controversy exceeds $75,000. Plaintiff does not quantify the total amount of damages she seeks to recover, but states that she is “seeking damages against Defendants [sic] for lost wages and emotional distress” and requests that the Court “[a]ward[] Plaintiff compensatory monetary and/or economic damages, including but not limited to the loss of past and future income, wages, compensation, and other benefits of employment, incurred as a result of Defendants’ [sic] violations of NYCHRL and the NYSHRL” in addition to “punitive damages,” “reasonable 7 of 71 TSE oe NOL ETTORE DRIVE PROTEGE INDEX NO. 531821/2023 ge 6 of Ig eppp iivSter: 01/03/2024 attorney’s fees, costs, and expenses of the action under NYCHRL and the NYSHRL,” and “pre- judgment and post-judgment interest, retroactive to the date the damages accrue, under the NYCHRL and the NYSHRL.” Ex. A at 5, | 1 and 15, “Wherefore” clause. 17. Plaintiff brings six causes of action against Prime Now, alleging that Prime Now purportedly violated NYCHRL and NYSHRL by discriminating against her based on gender, creating a hostile work environment, and retaliating against her. See generally Ex. A. Under these statutes, a prevailing plaintiff may recover back pay, front pay, compensatory damages (including emotional distress damages), punitive damages, attorneys’ fees and costs, and injunctive and equitable relief. Neither statute limits or caps the amount of damages that may be awarded to a prevailing plaintiff. See Gutierrez v. Taxi Club Mgmt., Inc., 2018 WL 3432786, at *6 (E.D.N.Y. June 25, 2018), report and recommendation adopted sub nom. Gutierrez v. Taxi Club Mgmt., Inc., 2018 WL 3429903 (E.D.N.Y. July 16, 2018). 18. First, Plaintiff seeks compensatory damages in the form of back pay. Ex. A at 15, “Wherefore” clause. Plaintiff was terminated effective May 18, 2023. See Ex. B, Decl. of U. Otuonye, at j 8. Plaintiff alleges in her Complaint that she worked 40 hours per week at a rate of $17.30 per hour. See Ex. A at 7, {{ 14-15. Thus, Plaintiff's alleged backpay for the period of time between May 18, 2023 and the time of removal is approximately $22,836 (33 weeks of pay). 19. Second, Plaintiff seeks compensatory damages in the form of front pay. Ex. A at 15, “Wherefore” clause. Assuming the case does not go to trial for 24 months, front pay damages would accrue for another 104 weeks, for a total of $71,968. Taken together with Plaintiff's claim for backpay (totaling $94,804), her claim for lost wages alone exceeds $75,000. 20. Third, in addition to alleged lost wages, Plaintiff asserts that she is entitled to “compensation for mental anguish, humiliation, embarrassment, stress and anxiety, emotional and 8 of 71 TSE oe NOL ETTORE DRIVE PROTEGE INDEX NO. ge 7 of Ig CeppP tivscer: 01/03/2024 531821/2023 psychological pain and suffering, emotional and psychological distress and the physical manifestations caused, incurred as a result of Defendants’ [sic] violations of NYCHRL and the NYSHRL” in addition to “punitive damages.” Ex. A at 15. Prevailing plaintiffs seeking emotional distress and punitive damages as a result of alleged discrimination in violation of NYSHRL and NYCHRL have received in excess of $75,000 for such damages. See, e.g., Gutierrez, 2018 WL 3432786, at *10—-11 (awarding $130,000 in emotional distress damages and $850,000 in punitive damages in a case alleging, as here, gender discrimination, hostile work environment, and retaliation under NYSHRL and NYCHRL); Belvin v. Electchester Mgmt. LLC, 2023 WL 3645544, at *6-9 (E.D.N.Y. May 22, 2023) (upholding emotional distress damages of $50,000 for the plaintiff's hostile work environment claim and $75,000 for the plaintiff's retaliation claim, totaling $125,000; plus an additional $100,000 in punitive damages, all under NYSHRL and NYCHRL). True and correct copies of the foregoing are attached hereto as Exhibit D. 21. Like the plaintiffs in these lawsuits, Plaintiff alleges that she was discriminated against based on gender, experienced a hostile work environment, and was retaliated against and suffered emotional distress as a result. Accordingly, it is reasonable to assume, solely for the purposes of establishing the amount in controversy, that the Complaint puts at issue an excess of $75,000 for alleged emotional distress. 22. Fourth, Plaintiff also seeks recovery of attorneys’ fees. Ex. A at 15, “Wherefore” clause. “Attorneys’ fees can be considered as part of the amount in controversy where they are anticipated or awarded in the governing statute.” Henry v. Warner Music Grp. Corp., 2014 WL 1224575, at *3 (S.D.N.Y. Mar. 24, 2014). Here, NYSHRL and NYCHRL permit the recovery of reasonable attorneys’ fees. 23. Courts in the Second Circuit have awarded attorneys’ fees at hourly rates ranging 9 of 71 TSE oe NOL ETTORE DRIVE PROTEGE INDEX NO. 531821/2023 ge 8 of Ig eppEp iivSter: 01/03/2024 from $300 to $425 in employment discrimination actions arising under the NYCHRL. See Sass v. MTA Bus Co., 6 F.Supp.3d 238 (E.D.N.Y. 2014) (“Courts in this district have awarded hourly rates ranging from $300 to $425 for experienced solo practitioners in civil rights cases”). Considering the time Plaintiffs counsel has spent and can be expected to spend investigating Plaintiff's claims, drafting the Complaint, drafting and responding to discovery requests, defending Plaintiffs deposition, deposing Defendant’s witnesses, and engaging in dispositive motion practice as to Plaintiff's claims, it is reasonable to assume that Plaintiff's counsel will spend at least 200 attorneys’ hours (not including paralegal time) on litigation activity in this action. Applying a billable rate of $350 per attorney hour to a conservative estimate of 200 billable hours, the amount of attorneys’ fees in controversy is at least $70,000 ($350 times 200 hours). 24. Sixth, Plaintiff also seeks an unspecified amount of punitive damages. Ex. A at 15, “Wherefore” clause. “[I]f punitive damages are permitted under the controlling law, the demand for such damages may be included in determining whether the jurisdictional amount is satisfied.” A.F.A. Tours, Inc. v. Whitchurch, 937 F.2d 82, 87 (2d Cir. 1991). Punitive damages are available under the NYSHRL and NYCHRL. N.Y. Exec. Law § 297(4)(c); N.Y.C. Admin. Code § 8-502(a) (“[A]ny person claiming to be a person aggrieved by an unlawful discriminatory practice as defined in chapter 1 of this title [...] shall have a cause of action in any court of competent jurisdiction for damages, including punitive damages, and for injunctive relief and such other remedies as may be appropriate[.]”’); see also Chauca v. Abraham, 30 N.Y .3d 325, 334, 89 N.E.3d 475, 481 (2017) (clarifying standard for awarding punitive damages under the NYCHRL). 25. Even though the other categories of damages Plaintiff seeks satisfy the amount-in controversy requirement for diversity jurisdiction, Plaintiff's claims for punitive damages tips the scale even further above the $75,000 threshold. See, e.g., A.F.A. Tours, Inc. v. Whitchurch, 937 10 of 71 TSE oe NOL ETTORE DRIVE PROTEGE INDEX NO. 531821/2023 ge 9 of Ig epRP iivSter: 01/03/2024 F.2d 82, 87 (2d Cir. 1991) (“if punitive damages are permitted under the controlling law, the demand for such damages may be included in determining whether the jurisdictional amount is satisfied.”); Kaminski v. Polish & Slavic Fed. Credit Union, 2007 WL 2343673, at *5 (E.D.N.Y. Aug. 13, 2007) (finding that the plaintiff's damages, including an unspecified amount of punitive damages, met § 1332’s amount-in-controversy requirement). 26. In sum, taking Plaintiff's alleged damages together—but without conceding that Plaintiff is entitled to any relief at all—the amount placed in controversy by Plaintiff's Complaint surpasses $75,000, making removal proper under 28 U.S.C. § 1332. Ill. REMOVAL IS TIMELY 27. This Notice of Removal is timely filed pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1446 because it is filed within thirty (30) days of December 4, 2023, the date on which Prime Now received the Complaint and Summons from CSC, its Registered Agent. The notice of removal must be filed within thirty days after the receipt by the defendant, through service or otherwise, of a copy of the initial pleading. See 28 U.S.C. § 1446(b)(1). But “service on a statutory agent’”—such as the New York Secretary of State—“does not trigger the 30-day removal period” under § 1446(b)(1). Moran v. Trans States Airlines, LLC, 2020 WL 5912391, at *3 (S.D.N.Y. Oct. 6, 2020); see also Medina v. Wal-Mart Stores, 945 F.Supp. 519, 520 (W.D.N.Y. 1996). Rather, “the time for removal begins to run only when the defendant or someone who is the defendant’s agent-in-fact receives the notice via service.” Sara v. Talcott Resolution Life Ins. Co., 2022 WL 19182, at *2 (S.D.N.Y. Jan. 3, 2022) (quoting 14C Charles Alan Wright et al., Federal Practice & Procedure § 3731 (Rev. 4th ed. 2021 update)). “[T]he heavy weight of authority in the Second Circuit” supports this proposition. Grello v. J.C. Penny Corp., 2003 WL 22772397, at *2 (S.D.N.Y. Nov. 21, 2003) (quoting Cygielman v. Cunard Line Ltd., 890 F.Supp. 305, 307 (S.D.N.Y. 1995)); see also UI Acquisition 9 11 of 71 ILED: NYSCEF KINGS DOC. NO- NITY. RK_0170372024 Document I~ Fred Ui INDEX NO. 531821/2023 e 10 of Ie epREP tivs&r: 01/03/2024 Holding Co. v. Arch Ins. Co., 2020 WL 103509, at *3 n.1 (N.D.N.Y. Jan. 9, 2020) (collecting cases). Accordingly, Prime Now’s deadline to remove this Action to federal court is January 3, 2024, thirty (30) days from December 4, 2023, when Prime Now received a copy of the Complaint and Summons from CSC. Ex. A. at 1. 28. No previous Notice of Removal has been filed or made with this Court for the relief sought herein. Iv. THE OTHER PREREQUISITES FOR REMOVAL ARE SATISFIED 29. “[A]ny civil action brought in a State court of which the district courts of the United States have original jurisdiction, may be removed by the defendant [...] to the district court of the United States for the district and division embracing the place where such action is pending.” 28 U.S.C. § 1441(a). The Eastern District of New York encompasses the Supreme Court of the State of New York, County of Kings, where the Action was originally filed. 30. In accordance with 28 U.S.C. § 1446(a), Prime Now has attached hereto as Exhibit A true and correct copies of all process, pleadings, and orders either existing on file in the State Court in this Action or otherwise served on Prime Now and its counsel of record. 31. Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1446(d), a copy of this Notice of Removal will be filed with the Supreme Court of the State of New York, County of Kings, and will be served on all parties. 32. Nothing in this Notice of Removal shall be interpreted as a waiver or relinquishment of Prime Now’s rights to assert any defense or affirmative matter, including without limitation statutes of limitations, jurisdictional and venue defenses, and defenses related to service. Nor shall it be construed as an admission of liability or that Plaintiff is entitled to any damages or other relief. 10 12 of 71 ILED: NYSCEF KINGS DOC. NO- NITY. RK_0170372024 Document I~ Fred Ui INDEX NO. 531821/2023 e 11 of Ig eppp tivdcer: 01/03/2024 Vv. CONCLUSION Defendant respectfully requests that the Action, now pending in the Supreme Court of the State of New York, County of Kings, Index No. 531821/2023, be removed to the United States District Court for the Eastern District of new York and that this Court accept jurisdiction over the Action and that the Action be entered on the docket of this Court for further proceedings as though the Action had originally been instituted in this Court. Dated: January 3, 2024 Respectfully submitted, MoraGaNn, LEwIs & Bockius LLP By: /s/ Ashley J. Hale Ashley J. Hale 101 Park Avenue New York, NY 10178 212-309-6878 ashley.hale@morganlewis.com Counsel for Defendant Prime Now LLC 11 13 of 71 ILED: NYSCEF DOC. KINGS N NTY. RK_0170372024 Document I~ Fred ULSI: 9: BEN INDEX NO. e 12 of Ie epRED tivdcer: 531821/2023 01/03/2024 CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE The undersigned hereby certifies the foregoing Notice of Removal was served via U.S Mail with postage prepaid and electronic mail on the following counsel of record on January 3 2024 AKIN & SALAMAN Hakan Sen 45 Broadway, Suite 1420 New York, NY 10006 212-825-1400 hakan@akinlaws.com Counsel for Plaintiff Lurline Hermina Samartha Shaw /s/ Ashley J. Hale Ashley J. Hale 12 14 of 71 ILED: KINGS UN LERK_ 0170372024 = INDEX NO. 531821/2023 NYSCEF DOC. : OCUNTETIT ~L~ Filed UiT e 1 bee Te ES hVEcER: 01/03/2024 % CSC null / ALL Transmittal Number: 28108317 Notice of Service of Process Date Processed: 12/05/2023 Primary Contact: Ms. Lynn Radliff Amazon.Com, Inc. 440 Terry Ave N Seattle, WA 98109-5210 Electronic copy provided to: Theresa Nixon Maria Catana Lynn Foley-J efferson Vivian Ching Lacy O'Block Stephanie Habben Kimberly Thomas Karen Curtis Lizette Fernandez Entity: Prime Now LLC Entity ID Number 3608800 Entity Served: Prime Now LLC Title of Action: Lurline Hermina Samartha Shaw vs. Prime Now LLC Matter Name/ID: Lurline Hermina Samartha Shaw vs. Prime Now LLC (14934875) Document(s) Type: Summons/Complaint Nature of Action: Discrimination Court/Agency: Kings County Supreme Court, NY Case/Reference No: 531821/2023 Jurisdiction Served: New York Date Served on CSC: 12/04/2023 Answer or Appearance Due: 30 Days Originally Served On: Dept. of State How Served: Certified Mail Sender Information: Akin & Salaman 212-825-1400 Client Requested Information: Amazon Case Type: Employment Litigation Information contained on this transmittal form is for record keeping, notification and forwarding the attached document(s). It does not constitute a legal opinion. The recipient is responsible for interpreting the documents and taking appropriate action. To avoid potential delay, please do not send your response to CSC 251 Little Falls Drive, Wilmington, Delaware 19808-1674 (888) 690-2882 | sop@cscglobal.com 15 of 71 E 0170372024 i PI INDEX NO. 531821/2023 I” DOCUMTTETIC ~~” Fred ge 2 of ReFAVEP WYSKEF: 01/03/2024 STATE OF NEW YORK DEPARTMENT OF STATE KATHY HOCHUL ONE COMMERCE PLAZA GOVERNOR 99 WASHINGTON AVENUE ALBANY, NY 12231-0001 ROBERT J. RODRIGUEZ WWW.DOS.NY.GOV SECRETARY OF STATE November 29, 2023 C/O CORPORATION SERVICE COMPANY 80 STATE STREET ALBANY NY 12207, USA RE: Party Served: PRIME NOW LLC Plaintiff/Petitioner: LURLINE HERMINA SAMARTHA SHAW Receipt Number: 202311290933 Date Served: 11/20/2023 Section of Law: SECTION 303 OF THE LIMITED LIABILITY COMPANY LAW To whom it may concern: Enclosed is a legal document that was served upon the Secretary of State as the designated agent of the above named party. The Department of State is required by. law to forward this legal document to the address on file for such party. This office is not authorized to offer legal advice. If you have any questions concerning this document, please contact your attorney. Recently enacted legislation permits process to be served electronically on the Secretary of State as agent of a domestic or authorized foreign corporation, limited liability company, limited partnership, limited liability partnership, general association or condominium board, provided such entity has provided the Department of State with an email address for electronic service of process notification. If the above named party has not already done so, it may provide the Department of State with an email address to which the Department will email a notice of the fact that process against such party has been electronically served upon the Secretary of State. A copy of any process served electronically will be made available to the party served through the Department’s Electronic Service of Process webpage. Entities may provide the Department with an email address through the amendment procedure permitted by the law for such entity. Sincerely, Department of State Division of Corporations, State Records and Uniform Commercial Code (518) 473-2492 NEWYORK | Department SPPORTUNITY. of State 16 of 71 (FILED: KIN IGS CO KK_O1/ 3/202 M) INDEX NO. 531821/2023 SOREEDDS Ge 3 Of REGAGRBEN NEES 3 DAz PIRI NYSCEF Doe. wo. 1 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 10/31/2023 SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK COUNTY OF KINGS Xx LURLINE HERMINA SAMARTHA SHAW, Index No. Plaintiff, SUMMONS -against- Plaintiff designates: PRIME NOW LLC, KINGS County as the The basis of the venue is Defendant. Plaintiff's residence panne ene eee eee tenner enn nnenennnnennnnnnnnnnnnene! X To the above-named Defendant: YOU ARE HEREBY SUMMONED to answer the complaint in this action and to serve a copy of your answer, or, if the complaint is not served with this summons, to serve a notice of appearance, on the plaintiff's attorney within 20 days after the service of this summons, exclusive of the day of service (or within 30 days after the service is complete if this summons is not personally delivered to you within the State of New York); and in case of your failure to appear or answer, judgment will be taken against you by default for the relief demanded in the complaint. Dated: October 31, 2023 New York, New York Akin & Salaman /s/ Hakan Sen Hakan Sen Robert D. Salaman 45 Broadway, Suite 1420 New York, NY 10006 Telephone: (212) 825-1400 Facsimile: (212) 825-1440 hakan@akinlaws.com ‘ob@akinlaws.com Counsel for Plaintiff 1 of 15 17 of 71 NGS INTY_Cl KK_O1/ [202 09:01 INDEX NO. 531821/2023 Fl EDS © 4 Of RE CAGRUENYNRE RSs a7 D FAA 4 NYSCEF DOC. NO. 1 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 10/31/2023 Defendant’s Address: Prime Now LLC (Via Secretary of State) 850 3rd Ave, Brooklyn New York 11232 2 of 15 18 of 71 INDEX NO. 531821/2023 (FILED: KIN KK_O1/ [202 CAGED N C5 Of RE GAGRBEN Rt E53 LPR 4 NYSCEF DOC. NO. RECEIVED NYSCEF: 10/31/2023 SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK COUNTY OF KINGS Xx LURLINE HERMINA SAMARTHA SHAW, Index No. Plaintiff, VERIFIED COMPLAINT -against- Jury Trial Demanded PRIME NOW LLC, Defendant. eect ee enn ene een ene neem enema Plaintiff Lurline Hermina Samartha Shaw (“Shaw” or “Plaintiff’) alleges against Defendant Prime Now LLC (“Prime” or “Amazon” or “Defendant”), upon information and belief, as follows: NATURE OF THE CLAIMS Shaw complains pursuant to the New York State Human Rights Law, N.Y. Exec. Law § 290, et seq., ("NYSHRL"), and the New York City Human Rights Law, N.Y. Admin. Code § 8-101, et seq. ("NYCHRL"), seeking damages against Defendants for lost wages and emotional distress as a result of being discriminated against by Defendants on the basis of her gender / sex. Further, Shaw was retaliated against by Defendants on the basis of her gender / sex. Shaw seeks relief under the New York State and the New York City anti-discrimination and anti-retaliation laws which are intended to afford all employees the same rights, regardless of their gender, and provide them with the dignity and respect they deserve in the workplace. 3 of 15 19 of 71 INDEX NO. 531821/2023 (FILED: KIN Big 9® © Of RE GAGRLEN Nee a3 ayep0RD4 NYSCEF DOC. NO. 1 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 10/31/2023 As such, this is an action for declaratory, injunctive and monetary relief to redress Defendants’ unlawful employment practices, including unlawful gender discrimination, a hostile work environment and retaliation committed against Plaintiff. The unlawful acts described herein were committed in violation of the NYSHRL and NYCHRL. PARTIES Plaintiff Lurline Hermina Samartha Shaw 6 At the time of filing this action, Plaintiff Lurline Hermina Samartha Shaw (“Shaw” “Plaintiff’) was and is a resident of Kings County in the State of New York. 7. Shaw is a woman. 8 Shaw has been an employee of Prime within the meaning of the NYSHRL and NYCHRL.