Case Document 1 Filed 12/31/15 Page 1 of 11 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON AT SEATTLE MICHAEL G. KATZE. Plaintiff, v. ANA MARI CAUCE, in her of?cial capacity as President of the University of Washington; GERALD J. BALDASTY, in his of?cial capacity as Interim Provost of the University of Washington; CHERYL A. CAMERON, in her of?cial capacity as University of Washington Vice Provost for Academic Personnel; PAUL G. RAMSEY, in his of?cial capacities as University of Washington Chief Executive Of?cer of UW Medicine, Executive Vice President for Medical Affairs and Dean of the School of Medicine; JOHN T. SLATTERY, in his of?cial capacity as University of Washington Medical School Vice Dean for Research and Graduate Education; and JAMES J. CHAMPOUX, in his of?cial capacity as the Chair of the University of Washington Department of Microbiology, Defendants. NO. 15-2035 COMPLAINT FOR INJUNCTIVE RELIEF FOR VIOLATION OF DUE PROCESS PROPERTY AND LIBERTY INTERESTS UNDER THE FOURTEENTH AMENDMENT OF THE UNITED STATES CONSTITUTION Now comes plaintiff Michael G. Katze, by and through counsel, and sets forth his complaint against defendants and each of them as follows: COMPLAINT - 1 THE ROSEN LAW FIRM Suite 1200 Hoge Building 705 Second Avenue Seattle, WA 98104-1798 (206) 652?1464 Case Document 1 Filed 12/31/15 Page 2 of 11 I. PARTIES 1.1 Plaintiff Michael G. Katze (hereinafter ?Katze?) is and has been at all relevant times a tenured professor at the University of Washington residing within the Western District of Washington. 1.2 Defendant Ana Mari Cauce (hereinafter ?Cauce?) is and was at all times relevant hereto the President of the University of Washington, residing and working within the Western District of Washington. 1.3 Defendant Gerald J. Baldasty (hereinafter ?Baldasty?) is and was at all times relevant hereto the Interim Provost of the University of Washington, residing and working within the Western District of Washington. 1.4 Defendant Cheryl A. Cameron (hereinafter ?Cameron?) is and was at all times relevant hereto the University of Washington Vice Provost for Academic Personnel, residing and working within the Western District of Washington. 1.5 Defendant Paul G. Ramsey (hereinafter ?Ramsey?) is and was at all times relevant hereto the Dean of the University of Washington School of Medicine, residing and working within the Western District of Washington. 1.6 Defendant John T. Slattery (hereinafter ?Slattery?) is and was at all times relevant hereto the University of Washington Medical School Vice Dean for Research and Graduate Education, residing and working within the Western District of Washington. 1.7 Defendant James J. Champoux (hereinafter ?Champoux?) is and was at all times relevant hereto the Chair of the University of Washington Department of Microbiology, residing and working within the Western District of Washington. COMPLAINT - 2 THE ROSEN LAW FIRM Suite 1200 Hoge Building 705 SecondAvenue Seatde, WA 98104?1798 (206) 652-1464 8% Case Document 1 Filed 12/31/15 Page 3 of 11 II. JURISDICTION AND VENUE 2.1 This court has jurisdiction over this matter by virtue of 28 U.S.C. 1331. This matter arises under the Constitution of the United States. 2.2 This court is the appropriate venue in accordance with 28 U.S.C. 1391. BACKGROUND AND EVENTS 3.1 Katze has been employed by the University of Washington since February 1987. He is a tenured professor in the Department of Microbiology within the University of Washington School of Medicine. He is also Associate Director of the Washington National Primate Research Center. Katze is supervised by Champoux who, in turn, reports through the chain of defendants to Cauce. 3.2 Katze runs a laboratory known as the ?Katze Lab? at the University of Washington?s South Lake Union campus that is focused on the use of systems biology approaches to de?ne and model virus/host interactions, innate immune signaling, and the varied strategies used by viruses to evade cellular defense mechanisms. The lab studies a wide range of viral pathogens, including pandemic and highly pathogenic avian in?uenza viruses, SARS and MERS coronaviruses, Ebola virus, and human and simian immune de?ciency viruses. Katze is the author of over 270 papers and reviews and has been honored with, among others, the Milstein Award for the International Society of Interferon and Cytokine Research and the Dozor Scholar Award by the Israeli Microbiology Society. He is a Fellow of the American Society of Microbiology. The Katze Lab employs over 30 research scientists and other professionals who rely on him for mentoring and direction. COMPLAINT 3 THE ROSEN LAW FIRM Seattle, WA 98104-1798 (206) 652-1464 Suite 1200 Hoge Building 705 Second Avenue Case Document 1 Filed 12/31/15 Page 4 of 11 3.3 Katze and his staff have been awarded or are in the process of being awarded grants totaling over $30 million from the Department of Defense, the Department of Homeland Security, the National Science Foundation, the National Institutes of Health, and other government and private organizations. 3.4 Katze is regularly invited to lecture and conduct seminars and symposia in the United States and around the world. This year alone has presented at Columbia University, Stanford University, the University of Iowa, UC Berkeley, Kansas State University, Colorado State University, and institutions in Israel, Germany, Portugal and Spain, among others. 3.5 On approximately July 23, 2015 Katze, through the University of Washington School of Medicine?s Human Resources Department, noti?ed Jane Doe], an administrative employee in his lab, that she had performance issues that needed to be addressed. Within a few days of receiving the letter Ms. Doe complained to the University that she was the victim of sexual harassment for more than a year including claims that Katze made sexual advances to her including touching and kissing and that on July 20, 2015 he exposed himself to her in his office and suggested oral sex. 3.6 As a result of these charges the University of Washington instituted a thorough investigation by its University Complaint Investigation and Resolution Of?ce (UCIRO) and placed Katze on ?home assignment? during the investigation. However, because Katze and his laboratory cannot function without his presence Champoux, Katze?s supervisor and Chair of the Department of Microbiology, allowed Katze wide latitude to access his lab and staff. 27 Pseudonyms will be used to identify certain individuals to protect their privacy even though they have not asked to be so identified. COMPLAINT 4 THE ROSEN LAW FIRM Seattle, WA 98104?1798 (206) 652-1464 Suite 1200 Hoge Building 705 Second Avenue Case Document 1 Filed 12/31/15 Page 5 of 11 3.7 Katze was shocked by these charges since during the ?ve years that Ms. Doe worked for him he had become a close friend of her and her husband, often a guest in their home or otherwise socializing with them. Because of his busy work and travel schedule Ms. Doe regularly offered to assist Katze with work-related and personal chores. 3.8 Access by Katze to his lab when he is not traveling, as he frequently is, is essential to exercising and ful?lling his responsibilities under the several federal grants. He must oversee the staff, conduct meetings with grantor representatives and colleagues from the University of Washington and other institutions, and, of course, he must do his own research. 3.9 On October 16, 2015 Katze was provided notice by Champoux that Ms. Doe had made additional charges, including several additional instances of exposing himself to her and sexually assaulting her over a period of years. 3.10 Additionally, on October 16 Champoux noti?ed Katze that another employee in his lab, Mary Roe, with whom Katze had had a personal relationship, had complained of quid pro quo sexual harassment in that Katze had used his supervisory relationship with her and gifts to receive sexual favors. While Champoux advised Katze that the ?home assignment? was extended he continued to allow unfettered lab access upon receipt of requests from Katze. 3.11 The accusations that Katze exposed himself on one or more occasions or sexually assaulted Ms. Doe are untrue. Neither is it true that Katze unlawfully sexually harassed her, Ms. Roe, or any other University of Washington employee. COMPLAINT 5 THE ROSEN LAW FIRM Suite 1200 Hoge Building 705 Second Avenue Seattle, WA 98104-1798 (206) 652-1464 Case Document 1 Filed 12/31/15 Page 6 of 11 3.12 During his investigation Ian Messerle, an employee of UCIRO, met with many current and former employees of the Katze Lab, several of them more than once. He admitted to Katze that during several of these investigatory meetings he revealed that Ms. Doe had alleged that Katze had exposed himself and had otherwise engaged in unlawful sex harassment and that he (Messerle) believed her. 3.13 Over the course of several months Messerle tried to convince Ms. Roe to bring her own charges of sex harassment. Ms. Roe, despite fear of retribution from the University, refused and has continued to refuse to bring any claims against Katze and does not believe that she was sexually harassed. 3.14 On approximately November 25, 2015 Messerle ?completed? his investigation and subsequently orally informed Ramsey, Champoux and others in Katze?s supervisory chain that while he did not ?nd Ms. Doe credible and considered the charges she leveled to be fabrications and although Ms. Roe did not agree to complain about Katze?s behavior towards her nevertheless Katze was guilty of unlawful ?implicit? sex harassment against Ms. Doe and Ms. Roe. On December 21, 2015 Messerle provided Katze with the same information. Messerle told Katze that he would not put his ??ndings? in written form. 3.15 On December 22, 2015 Champoux noti?ed Katze in writing that his ?home assignment? was being ?signi?cantly modi?ed? and that he was no longer going to be permitted to go into the building in which his laboratory was located or ?have ?y interaction with laboratory members (faculty, staff, or trainees) or departmental administrative staff of any sort, including in person, by phone, by email or by any other means.? (Emphasis in original.) Champoux also noti?ed Katze that the University was COMPLAINT - 6 THE ROSEN LAW FIRM Suite 1200 Hoge Building 705 SecondAvenue Seatde, WA 98104?1798 (206) 652?1464 $9 Case Document 1 Filed 12/31/15 Page 7 of 11 in the process of notifying the federal and other granting agencies of the ?home assignment? and the directive that he not communicate with his laboratory staff. On information and belief at the time this complaint is being ?led the University has not yet contacted granting agencies but such contact is imminent. 3.16 Thereafter, on December 23, 2015, Champoux and representatives from the Dean?s office, the Attorney General?s of?ce, and other unidenti?ed individuals met with employees of the Katze Lab to inform them that the investigation was concluded, that Katze was prohibited from accessing the building on South Lake Union where his lab is located, and that they were prohibited from having any oral or written contact with Katze regardless of whether it was employment related or personal. The Katze Lab employees were shocked and upset, frightened for their jobs, and unsure as to how they were to continue their work without being able to communicate with Katze. Champoux told the staff at this meeting that the University was currently evaluating whether to inform funding agencies and that a decision would be made ?sometime in January.? Several on the staff complained to Champoux and his colleagues that informing funding agencies would have the effect of shutting down the lab since Katze was the principal investigator on virtually all of the grants. Champoux nor his colleagues had a response to this concern, instead offering the staff members access to a University counselor who was available immediately outside the room where Champoux addressed the staff. 3.17 As a professor with tenure Katze has a right ?to hold his or her position without discriminatory reduction of salary, and not to suffer loss of such position, or discriminatory reduction of salary, except for? certain enumerated reasons contained in COMPLAINT - 7 THE ROSEN LAW FIRM Suite 1200 Hoge Building 705 Second Avenue Seattle, WA 98104?1798 (206) 652-1464 Case Document 1 Filed 12/31/15 Page 8 of 11 the University?s Faculty Code? and then only after Katze is provided with notice and an opportunity to be heard. 3.18 The charges against Katze impair his reputation for honesty and morality. His good name and integrity are damaged and create a stigma which could foreclose other employment and scienti?c opportunities. He has been denied the opportunity to clear his name since the University has afforded him no mechanism with which to do so. IV. FIRST CAUSE OF ACTION: VIOLATION OF DUE PROCESS PROPERTY INTERESTS 4.1 Katze realleges paragraphs 1.1 through 3.18 as if fully set forth herein. 4.2 Section 1 of the Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution reads as follows: All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the state wherein they reside. No state shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of the citizens of the United States; nor shall any state deprive any person of right, liberty, or property without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction equal protection of the laws. 4.3 In its capacity as a public agency the University of Washington created property interests for Katze in his employment when it limited its power to terminate him or cause him to lose his position. 4.4 Katze has a right under the Fourteenth Amendment of the United States Constitution to due process of law as a result of property interests he enjoyed in his employment at the University of Washington. 4.5 An integral part of the process to which Katze is due is a notice of charges and opportunity to be heard thereon before adverse action is taken. COMPLAINT - 8 THE ROSEN LAW FIRM SeatrJe, WA 98104?1798 (206) 652?1464 @o Suite 1200 Hoge Building 705 Second Avenue Case Document 1 Filed 12/31/15 Page 9 of 11 4.6 Placing Katze on ?home assignment? and prohibiting him from communicating with his staff is a signi?cant alteration of his position that effectively removed him from his position in his chosen ?eld. 4.7 Defendants and each of them have denied Katze the ability to exercise these rights as guaranteed by the Fourteenth Amendment of the United States Constitution. 4.8 Denial of Katze?s due process property interests has caused and will continue to cause him irreparable harm. 4.9 Katze has a likelihood of success on the merits of his claim. 4.10 The interest of Katze to enforcement of his due process property interests outweighs any interest of the University of Washington and its defendant agents. V. SECOND CAUSE OF ACTION: VIOLATION OF DUE PROCESS LIBERTY INTERESTS 5.1 Katze realleges paragraphs 1.1 through 4.9 as if fully set forth herein. 5.2 Katze is an employee of an agency of the State of Washington. 5.3 Katze?s good name, reputation, honor, and integrity have been damaged and have created a stigma which unless immediately remedied will foreclose further employment opportunities. 5.4 Katze contests the accuracy of the charges. 5.5 The charges have been made public during the process that has led to a significant alteration of Katze?s tenure rights and status as recognized by law. 5.6 By virtue of the foregoing Katze has been deprived of his due process liberty interests guaranteed by the Fourteenth Amendment of the United States COMPLAINT - 9 THE ROSEN LAW FIRM Suite 1200 Hoge Building 705 Second Avenue Seattle, WA 98104-1798 (206) 652?1464 Case Document 1 Filed 12/31/15 Page 10 of 11 Constitution. 5.7 Deprivation of Katze?s due process liberty interests has caused and will continue to cause him irreparable harm. 5.8 Katze has a likelihood of success on the merits of his claim. 5.9 The interest of Katze to enforcement of his due process liberty interests outweighs any interest of the University of Washington and its defendant agents. V. PRAYER FOR RELIEF Wherefore, plaintiff prays that the Court: 1. Find that defendants and each of them have violated Katze? 5 due process property interests as protected by the Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution. 2. Find that defendants and each of them have violated Katze?s due process liberty interests as protected by the Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution. 3. Preliminarin and permanently enjoin defendants and each of them from continuing to violate Katze?s due process property and liberty interests, directing them to allow Katze an opportunity to be heard and a name clearing hearing and prohibiting them from contacting any granting agencies regarding Michael Katze and immediately restoring full access to his lab and staff by lifting the home assignment and prohibition against communicating and working with his lab staff. 4. Award Katze his costs and reasonable attorney?s fees. 5. Award such other and different relief as the Court deems just and appropriate. COMPLAINT -10 THE ROSEN LAW FIRM Seattle, WA 98104?1798 (206) 652-1464 ?@513 Suite 1200 Hogs Building 705 Second Avenue Case Document 1 Filed 12/31/15 Page 11 of 11 DATED this 31St day of December, 2015. COMPLAINT - 1 1 THE ROSEN LAW FIRM 13Wh Jon Howard Rosen, 7543 Attorney for Plaintiff THE ROSEN LAW FIRM Suite 1200 Hoge Building 705 Second Avenue Seattle, WA 98104?1798 (206) 652-1464