The Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals has ruled in favor of Dr. Ding Ding, a former Chief Financial Officer at Structure Therapeutics, Inc., allowing her to pursue her sexual harassment claims in federal court. This decision comes after Dr. Ding initially filed for arbitration regarding her workplace disputes, but later withdrew to file under the Ending Forced Arbitration of Sexual Assault and Sexual Harassment Act of 2021 (EFAA). The court's ruling emphasizes the rights of victims of workplace harassment to choose their legal path, which could have significant implications for future cases.
Dr. Ding was employed by Structure Therapeutics, a clinical drug development company, until her termination in March 2022. Following her dismissal, she filed a demand for arbitration, claiming discrimination and harassment based on her national origin and status as a domestic violence victim. However, during the arbitration process, she uncovered evidence that her mistreatment was also motivated by her sex. This led her to withdraw from arbitration and file a lawsuit in federal court, which Structure Therapeutics contested.
The case reached the Ninth Circuit after the district court denied Structure's motion to compel arbitration. The court ruled that Dr. Ding could invoke her rights under the EFAA, which allows victims of sexual harassment and assault to invalidate predispute arbitration agreements and pursue their claims in court. The court's opinion, written by Judge Gabriel P. Sanchez, highlighted that the EFAA was designed to provide victims with a genuine choice to seek justice in a court of law.
The court stated, "Both the text of the statute and its underlying purpose make clear that Congress intended to afford victims of workplace sexual assault and sexual harassment a genuine choice whether to pursue their claims in a court of law, notwithstanding a preexisting agreement to arbitrate." This ruling confirms that a plaintiff can withdraw from arbitration if they discover a basis for sexual harassment claims during the process.
Dr. Ding's case began when she was recruited by Structure Therapeutics in 2021. Despite her qualifications and experience, she faced significant challenges in her role. Dr. Raymond Stevens, the CEO, allegedly sidelined her and dismissed her contributions, leading to a hostile work environment. After a domestic violence incident in March 2022, Dr. Ding was terminated, with Stevens citing her personal situation as a factor in his decision.
Initially, Dr. Ding filed for arbitration in October 2022, asserting claims of discrimination and harassment. However, after discovering new evidence during the arbitration process, she opted to withdraw and pursue her claims in federal court under the EFAA. Structure Therapeutics argued that her initial arbitration demand waived her right to pursue her claims in court, but the court found no evidence that she was aware of her sexual harassment claim when she filed for arbitration.
The Ninth Circuit's ruling reinforces the notion that victims should not be penalized for discovering the nature of their claims during legal proceedings. The court emphasized that Dr. Ding did not have a plausible sexual harassment claim at the time she filed for arbitration, as she was not aware of the sex-based nature of her mistreatment until later.
This ruling could have far-reaching implications for other victims of workplace harassment who may find themselves in similar situations. It highlights the importance of the EFAA in providing a pathway for victims to seek justice in court, rather than being forced into arbitration, which can often limit their options.
Looking ahead, it remains to be seen whether Structure Therapeutics will appeal the Ninth Circuit's decision. The case underscores the ongoing debate surrounding arbitration agreements in employment contracts, particularly in relation to sexual harassment and assault claims. As more cases arise under the EFAA, this ruling could set a precedent for how courts interpret the rights of victims in the workplace.