James Venable V Activision Blizzard

1 Patricio T.D.
Barrera, (SBN 149696)

[email protected]
2 BARRERA & ASSOCIATES, APC
2298 E. Maple Avenue
3 El Segundo, California 90245
Telephone: 310.802.1500
4 Facsimile: 310.802.0500
5 Attorneys for Plaintiff James Reid Venable
6
7
8 SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA
9 FOR THE COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES
10
11 JAMES REID VENABLE, an individual, Case No.
BARRERA & ASSOCIATES
TEL 310.802.1500 • FAX 310.802.0500

EL SEGUNDO, CALIFORNIA 90245
12 Plaintiff, COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES ALLEGING:

2298 E. MAPLE AVENUE
13 vs. 1. RETALIATION (Labor Code §1102.5);

2. AGE DISCRIMINATION (FEHA);
14 ACTIVISION BLIZZARD, INC, a Delaware 3. FAILURE TO TAKE ALL
Corporation; ACTIVISION PUBLISHING, REASONABLE STEPS TO PREVENT
15 INC., a Delaware Corporation, and DOES 1 DISCRIMINATION AND
through 10, Inclusive, RETALIATION (FEHA); and
16 4. WRONGFUL TERMINATION IN
VIOLATION OF PUBLIC POLICY
17 Defendants.
DEMAND FOR JURY TRIAL
18
19
Plaintiff James Reid Venable based upon personal knowledge as to all acts or events that
20
Plaintiff has undertaken or witnessed, and upon information and belief as to all others, alleges:
21
INTRODUCTION
22
This case is brought under California’s whistleblower protection statute (Labor Code Section
23
1102.5) and the Fair Employment and Housing Act (FEHA). The Activision Defendants retaliated
24
and discriminated against Plaintiff by considering Plaintiff’s age when selecting Plaintiff for a
25
layoff, and retaliated against Plaintiff shortly after Plaintiff made a discrimination complaint to the
26
company’s Human Resources Manager. Activision’s stated reason for the layoff is pretextual.
27
Plaintiff suffered economic harm and emotional distress caused by Activision’s unlawful conduct.
28
1
COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES
1 PARTIES
2 1. Plaintiff James Reid Venable ("Plaintiff" or “Venable”) is, and at all times herein
3 was, an individual residing in the County of Los Angeles, State of California. Venable was
4 employed by the Defendants in the County of Los Angeles, State of California.
5 2. Defendant ACTIVISION BLIZZARD, INC. is, and at all times herein mentioned
6 was, a Delaware Corporation conducting business within the County of Los Angeles, State of
7 California and subject to the laws of California Government Code §§12940 et seq. and 12900 et.
8 seq. Activision Blizzard, Inc.’s corporate, primary headquarters, principal place of business, and
9 “nerve center” is located at 2701 Olympic Blvd., Building B, Santa Monica, California 90404,
10 within the County of Los Angeles. Plaintiff herein alleges and is informed and believes thereon that
11 Activision Blizzard, Inc. is a citizen of its principal place of business, within the County of Los
TEL 310.802.1500 • FAX 310.802.0500

12 Angeles, State of California.

13 3. Defendant ACTIVISION PUBLISHING, INC. is and at all times herein mentioned
14 was a Delaware Corporation conducting business within the County of Los Angeles, State of
15 California and subject to the laws of California Government Code §§12940 et seq. and 12900 et.
16 seq. Activision Publishing Inc.’s corporate, primary headquarters, principal place of business, and
17 “nerve center” is located at 2701 Olympic Blvd., Building B, Santa Monica, California 90404,
18 within the County of Los Angeles. Plaintiff herein alleges and is informed and believes thereon that
19 Activision Publishing, Inc. is a citizen of its principal place of business, within the County of Los
20 Angeles, State of California. The two, named defendants operate as a single employer or joint
21 employer and are collectively referred to herein as “Activision.”
22 4. Plaintiff is ignorant of the true names and capacities of Defendants sued as DOES 1
23 through 10, inclusive, and therefore sues these Defendants by such fictitious names. Plaintiff will
24 amend this complaint to allege their true names and capacities when ascertained. Plaintiff is
25 informed and believes, and alleges that each of the fictitiously named Defendants is responsible for
26 the alleged occurrences and injuries to Plaintiff.
27 5. Plaintiff is informed, believes, and alleges that, at all times herein mentioned,
28 Defendants, and each of them, were the agents or employees of each of the other Defendants, and
2
1 in doing the things hereinafter alleged, were acting within the course and scope of such agency
2 and/or employment and with the permission and consent of his/her co-Defendants. All of the named
3 defendants may be collectively referred to herein as “the Activision Defendants.”
4 VENUE AND JURISDICTION
5 6. Venue is proper under Code of Civil Procedure §395, and under the FEHA.
6 Plaintiff's injuries occurred within this jurisdiction, and the discriminatory and retaliatory actions
7 and layoff decisions that give rise to Plaintiff's complaint arose within this jurisdiction.
8 EXHAUSTION OF ADMINISTRATIVE PROCEEDINGS
9 7. Plaintiff exhausted his administrative remedies by filing complaints for
10 discrimination, retaliation and related claims under California’s Fair Employment and Housing Act
11 (the FEHA) with the California Civil Rights Department, formerly the Department of Fair
TEL 310.802.1500 • FAX 310.802.0500

12 Employment and Housing, on December 27, 2023 and thereafter, receiving "right to sue"
13 notifications on December 27, 2023. Thus, Plaintiff has duly exhausted all required administrative
14 proceedings and now properly files this Complaint for Damages.
15 FACTS COMMON TO ALL CAUSES OF ACTION
16 Activision’s Background
17 8. Activision is an American multinational technology corporation that produces video
18 game software. It is best known for its video game franchise Call of Duty.
19 9. Activision operates nationally and globally, with multiple locations worldwide. Its
20 corporate headquarters are located in Santa Monica, California. Activision employs thousands of
21 employees throughout California, including its corporate executives, officers, directors and key
22 managers within Los Angeles County.
23 10. Activision is, and was, a covered employer under the FEHA, codified at California
24 Government Code § 12926(d). As alleged below, Activision placed Profits Over Older People
25 (“POOP”) when terminating Plaintiff. Activision, therefore, has engaged in POOP.
26 Plaintiff’s Background
27 11. Plaintiff James Reid Venable, known also as “Jamie” Venable, is a 57-year-old
28 individual. Plaintiff was a covered employee under the FEHA.
3
1 12. In 2014, Plaintiff was hired by Activision. Plaintiff was promoted several times and
2 was a high performing executive at Activision. During Plaintiff’s nine-plus years of employment
3 with Activision, Plaintiff performed his duties and responsibilities in a positive and exemplary
4 manner. Plaintiff threw himself into his work at Activision, regularly working long hours to ensure
5 that his work was completed, and his project timelines, budgeting, and revenue forecasts were met.
6 13. Plaintiff led the operations team that built Activision’s division known as Central
7 Tech. Plaintiff was responsible for a $85+ million dollar operating budget and 200+ development
8 personnel in eight offices throughout the United States, Canada, and United Kingdom. Plaintiff
9 helped build Central Tech into a world class technological hub for the development of Call of Duty.
10 Plaintiff has been recognized as a successful and highly regarded people manager, team builder, and
11 talent developer of Activision employees.
TEL 310.802.1500 • FAX 310.802.0500

12 Facts Establishing Plaintiff’s Protected Activity and Defendants’ Wrongful, Discriminatory,

13 Retaliatory, and Illegal Conduct Giving Rise to This Complaint
14 14. Activision Blizzard’s Chief Executive Officer (CEO) Bobby Kotick announced at a
15 leadership conference held at the Casa Del Mar hotel in Santa Monica, CA that the “problem” with
16 Activision Blizzard is “there are too many old white guys.”
17 15. Shortly thereafter, two older, white executives, who were both in their 50s at the
18 time, a Senior Vice President and a Chief Technology Officer (CTO) left Activision based, at least
19 in part, on Kotick’s ageist remarks. The CTO was replaced by substantially younger workers.
20 16. One of the Executives was Plaintiff’s boss at the time. Before leaving Activision,
21 Plaintiff’s boss recommended that Plaintiff be promoted, and that the Central Tech and Demonware
22 divisions be consolidated under Plaintiff’s management and supervision.
23 17. Activision did not promote the older white employee – Plaintiff; instead, Activision
24 eventually promoted a substantially younger, less qualified, less experienced non-white employee,
25 Jonathan Lee. Plaintiff is informed and believes and herein alleges that the decision to promote the
26 substantially younger, less experienced employee over Plaintiff was based on the campaign to get
27 rid of “old white guys” within Activision.
28 / / /
4
1 18. Lee was Plaintiff’s “interim manager” for a few months. In that brief time period,
2 Lee created a hostile work environment, attacking Plaintiff’s performance and downgrading
3 Plaintiff’s performance reviews. Based on Lee’s criticisms of Plaintiff’s performance, Plaintiff was
4 given the lowest percentage merit increase in almost ten years of employment at Activision, a 1.75%
5 raise in base salary.
6 19. Activision employees were given “growth equity” stock in an effort to retain
7 employees who were perceived to be part of the long-term growth of the company. Historically,
8 stock grants aligned proportionally to job level; however, Plaintiff discovered that four of his seven
9 direct reports were given more stock than Plaintiff was given. Two of Plaintiff’s direct reports,
10 who were not “old white guys” like Plaintiff, were given additional stock equity grants of $50,000
11 each. A third employee, a Latina female, and in her early 30s was given an additional $95,000
TEL 310.802.1500 • FAX 310.802.0500

12 equity grant. Thus, younger, non-White male employes were treated differently and better than
13 Plaintiff.
14 20. In March 2023, one of the female employees in Plaintiff’s department made false,
15 defamatory remarks about Plaintiff’s “white male privilege” being a factor in her merit increase
16 being below her expectations in an email to Plaintiff’s boss, CTO Michael Vance and to Activision’s
17 Human Resources Director. Plaintiff was aware of another employee who was raising workplace
18 concerns about Activision management.
19 21. On March 20, 2023, Plaintiff complained to Activision’s Human Resources Director
20 about Activision’s failure to protect Plaintiff from the discriminatory and defamatory accusations.
21 Plaintiff was complaining of Defendant’s unlawful activity on the part of the Company’s deficient
22 Human Resources response and breach of duties owed to Plaintiff. Plaintiff gave notice of “formally
23 filing a complaint” regarding Activision’s failure to properly investigate the matter. Plaintiff asked
24 for “checks and balances” and made clear that Plaintiff “was the first person to sound an alarm that
25 a larger issue might be brewing.” Plaintiff demanded that “all accusations should be investigated
26 independently.” Plaintiff’s complaint was ignored and he was not taken seriously.
27 22. Hard on the heels of Plaintiff’s complaints, which constitute protected activity, under
28 Labor Code Section 1102.5 and the FEHA, Plaintiff experienced an adverse employment action,
5
1 when he was suddenly laid off from his employment for false and pretextual reasons.
2 23. On August 21, 2023, Plaintiff was informed that the Central Tech department was
3 going to be “restructured.” The restructuring initiative was an age-based effort cut costs and to
4 rejuvenate the workforce. Out of 200 employees, seven employees, including Plaintiff, were
5 selected for the layoff, and all seven were older, male employees ranging in age from age 47 to age
6 64. Activision placed profits over people by terminating the older, higher paid executives.
7 24. The stated reason for termination, “job elimination and restructuring needs” is false
8 and pretextual. Activision’s Central Tech department is currently hiring and expanding based on
9 online posts on the company’s website and on external job recruiting websites. (See,
10 www.careers.activision.com, Linkedin.com, showbizjobs.com, indeed.com, and other, similar

11 websites.
TEL 310.802.1500 • FAX 310.802.0500

12 25. As a result of being wrongfully terminated for discriminatory and/or retaliatory

13 reasons, Plaintiff has lost wages and his executive level compensation package including substantial
14 stock grants, important medical and health insurance benefits, and the like. Plaintiff has suffered
15 financial distress. Plaintiff lost his dignity and self-esteem, and has experienced physical injury,
16 illness, and emotional distress as a result of Defendants’ wrongful conduct as described herein.
17 FIRST CAUSE OF ACTION
RETALIATION (Labor Code Section 1102.5)
18 (As Against Defendants and DOES 1 through 10)
19 26. Plaintiff hereby incorporates and realleges by reference all paragraphs enumerated
20 above and each and every part thereof, of this Complaint, with the same force and effect as though
21 set forth at length herein.
22 27. California Labor Code § 1102.5 prohibits employers from retaliating against
23 employees who engage in protected “whistleblowing” activities when the employee has reasonable
24 cause to believe that the information discloses a violation of state or federal statute. In addition,
25 Labor Code § 1102.5 subd. (b) forbids retaliation if the employee disclosed, or the employer believes
26 he/she disclosed “to a person with authority over the employee or another employee who has the
27 authority to investigate, discover, or correct the violation or noncompliance.”
28 28. Plaintiff suffered an adverse employment action after making his complaints by
6
1 being denied jobs and promotions for which he was qualified and competent, and being forced out
2 under the pretextual excuse of a job elimination / lay off.
3 29. As alleged in greater detail above, there is a causal link between Plaintiff’s
4 complaints and the adverse employment actions.

5 30. As a proximate result of Defendants’ conduct and pursuant to Labor Code §
6 1102.5(f), Defendants are liable to Plaintiff for a civil penalty not to exceed ten thousand dollars
7 ($10,000.00).
8 31. As a further proximate result of Defendants’ conduct, Plaintiff has suffered actual,
9 consequential and incidental financial losses, including without limitation, loss of salary and
10 benefits, loss of stock grants and opportunities, and the intangible loss of employment-related
11 opportunities for growth in his field and damage to his professional reputation, all in an amount
TEL 310.802.1500 • FAX 310.802.0500

12 subject to proof at the time of trial. Plaintiff claims such amounts as damages together with
13 prejudgment interest pursuant to Civil Code §§3287 and/or 3288 and/or any other provision of law
14 providing for prejudgment interest.
15 32. As a further proximate result of the wrongful acts of Defendants, and each of them,
16 Plaintiff has suffered and continues to suffer anxiety, worry, embarrassment, humiliation, mental
17 anguish, and emotional distress and has incurred and will likely incur, medical expenses as a result.
18 Plaintiff is informed and believes and thereon alleges that Plaintiff will continue to experience said
19 pain and mental and emotional suffering for a period in the future he cannot presently ascertain, all
20 in an amount subject to proof at the time of trial.
21 33. As a further proximate result of the wrongful acts of Defendants, and each of them,
22 Plaintiff has been forced to hire attorneys to prosecute his claims herein, and has incurred and is
23 expected to continue to incur attorneys’ fees and costs in connection therewith. Upon being
24 determined the prevailing party, Plaintiff will be entitled to recover such attorneys’ fees and costs
25 under Labor Code §1102.5, as amended, and under Code of Civil Procedure §1021.5.
26 34. The acts taken toward Plaintiff were carried out by and/or ratified by Defendants
27 and/or managing agent employees of Defendants acting in a despicable, oppressive, fraudulent,

28 malicious, deliberate, egregious, and inexcusable manner in order to injure and damage Plaintiff.
7
1 Based on Defendant’s willful, malicious, despicable, and oppressive acts of unlawful retaliation
2 against Plaintiff, Venable seeks an award of other, special damages recoverable under California
3 law, including punitive damages in an amount according to proof. and every part thereof, of this
4 Complaint, with the same force and effect as though set forth at length herein.
5 SECOND CAUSE OF ACTION0
6 AGE DISCRIMINATION (FEHA)

(As Against Defendants and DOES 1 through 10)
7
35. Plaintiff incorporates and realleges by reference all previous paragraphs, and each
8
and every part thereof, of this Complaint, with the same force and effect as though set forth at length
9
herein.
10
36. Activision is an "employer" within the meaning of and subject to California
11
TEL 310.802.1500 • FAX 310.802.0500
Government Code§ 12900 et seq., commonly referred to as the California Fair Employment and
12
Housing Act (“FEHA”).

13
37. California Government Code § 12940(a) provides in pertinent part that, “It shall be
14
an unlawful employment practice . . . [f]or an employer, because of . . . age… to discharge the person
15
from employment . . . or to discriminate against the person . . . in terms, conditions, or privileges of
16
employment.” This Cause of Action stems from Defendant’s discriminatory termination of
17
Plaintiff’s employment by Defendants due to Plaintiff’s age. Plaintiff was 57 years old, and
18
protected from discrimination based on his age, at the time his employment was laid off, i.e.,
19
terminated.
20
38. California has a strong public policy interest in protecting employees that work in
21
California from discrimination on account of age. For instance, Government Code §12941 provides
22
as follows: “The Legislature further reaffirms and declares its intent that the courts interpret the
23
state’s statute prohibiting age discrimination in employment broadly and vigorously . . . and with
24
the goal of not only protecting older workers as individuals, but also of protecting older workers as
25
a group, since they face unique obstacles in the later phases of their careers.”
26
39. California law also recognizes that the use of salary as the basis for differentiating
27
between employees when terminating employment may be found to constitute age discrimination.
28
8
1 Govt. Code §12941.
2 40. Defendants elected to terminate Plaintiff, a hard-working, higher salaried and older
3 employee. After Plaintiff was terminated from his employment, his duties and responsibilities were
4 given to substantially younger employees. Similarly situated employees, who are substantially
5 younger than Plaintiff, were not fired and did not have their job performance subjected to the undue
6 scrutiny and false criticism Plaintiff was forced to endure. Defendants proceeded to recruit and hire
7 replacement worker who are believed to be substantially younger than Plaintiff. Thus, the stated
8 reason, job elimination/restructuring is pretextual.

9 41. The discriminatory actions of Defendants against Plaintiff, including, but not limited
10 to terminating Plaintiff from Plaintiff's employment due to Plaintiff’s age, constitute unlawful
11 discrimination based on age in violation of FEHA, codified in California Government Code §
TEL 310.802.1500 • FAX 310.802.0500

12 12940(a).
13 42. As a proximate result of the acts of Defendants, as described above, Plaintiff suffered
14 economic damages, including lost wages and benefits, and other compensatory damages in an
15 amount to be ascertained at the time of trial.
16 43. As a further proximate result of the aforementioned acts of Defendants, and each of
17 them, as alleged above, Plaintiff has suffered humiliation, mental anguish, anxiety, stress,
18 depression, and emotional and physical injury or illness, and has been injured in body and mind all
19 to Plaintiff's damage in an amount to be ascertained at the time of trial. As a proximate result of the
20 acts of Defendants, and each of them, as alleged above, Plaintiff has suffered physical and mental
21 injuries and has necessarily expended sums in the treatment of such injuries, all to Plaintiffs damage
22 in an amount to be ascertained at the time of trial. As a further proximate result of the acts of
23 Defendants, and each of them, inclusive, and each of them, as alleged above, Plaintiff will
24 necessarily continue to expend sums in the future for the treatment of the physical, emotional and
25 mental injuries sustained by Plaintiff as a result of said Defendants' acts in an amount to be
26 ascertained at the time of trial.
27 44. As a direct and proximate result of the above-described acts of Defendants, Plaintiff
28 has necessarily incurred attorney's fees and costs and, pursuant to the provisions of California
9
1 Government Code §12965(b), Plaintiff is entitled to the reasonable value of such attorney's fees and
2 costs.
3 45. The above-described unlawful conduct of Defendants, which was perpetrated,
4 authorized, and/or ratified by its officer(s), director(s), and/or managing agent(s), was willful,
5 intentional, and malicious and done with the intent to vex, injure and annoy Plaintiff; and was done
6 in conscious disregard of Plaintiff's rights, and, thus, warrant the imposition of exemplary and
7 punitive damages in an amount sufficient to punish said Defendants and to deter others from
8 engaging in similar despicable conduct.
9 THIRD CAUSE OF ACTION
FAILURE TO TAKE ALL REASONABLE STEPS TO PREVENT DISCRIMINATION IN
10 VIOLATION OF CALIFORNIA GOVERNMENT CODE § 12940(k)
(As Against Activision and DOES 1 through 10)
11
TEL 310.802.1500 • FAX 310.802.0500

12 46. Plaintiff hereby incorporates by this reference as if fully set forth herein, each and
13 every allegation set forth in each and every averment of Paragraphs set forth above in this
14 Complaint.
15 47. California Government Code Section 12940(k)(the FEHA) makes it an illegal
16 practice for an employer "to fail to take all reasonable steps necessary to prevent discrimination …
17 from occurring."
18 48. As a proximate result of the acts of Defendants, and each of them, as described above,
19 Plaintiff suffered economic damages, including lost wages and benefits, and other compensatory
20 damages in an amount to be ascertained at the time of trial.
22 them, Plaintiff has suffered humiliation, mental anguish, anxiety, stress, depression, and emotional
23 and physical distress, and has been injured in body and mind all to Plaintiff's damage in an amount
24 to be ascertained at the time of trial. As a proximate result of the acts of Defendants, as alleged
25 above, Plaintiff has suffered physical and mental injuries and has necessarily expended sums in the
26 treatment of such injuries, all to Plaintiff's damage in an amount to be ascertained at the time of trial.
27 As a further proximate result of the acts of Defendants, as alleged above, Plaintiff will necessarily
28 continue to expend sums in the future for the treatment of the physical, emotional and mental injuries
10
1 sustained by Plaintiff as a result of said Defendants' acts in an amount to be ascertained at the time
2 of trial.
3 50. As a direct and proximate result of the above-described acts of Defendants, Plaintiff
4 has necessarily incurred attorney's fees and costs and, pursuant to the provisions codified in
5 California Government Code Section 12965(b), Plaintiff is entitled to the reasonable value of such
6 attorney's fees.
TEL 310.802.1500 • FAX 310.802.0500


13 FOURTH CAUSE OF ACTION

WRONGFUL TERMINATION IN VIOLATION OF PUBLIC POLICY
14 (As Against Activision and DOES 1 through 10)
15 52. Plaintiff incorporates and realleges by reference all previous paragraphs, and each
16 and every part thereof, of this Complaint, with the same force and effect as though set forth at length
17 herein.
18 53. Under California law, no employee, whether they are an at-will employee, or an
19 employee under a written or other employment contract, can be terminated for a reason or reasons
20 that are in violation of fundamental public policies. California Courts have interpreted a
21 fundamental public policy to be any articulable constitutional, or statutory provision, or regulation
22 that is concerned with a matter effecting society at large rather than a purely personal or proprietary
23 interest of the employee or the employer. The public policy must be fundamental, substantial, and
24 well established at the time of discharge. California recognizes a public policy prohibiting age
25 discrimination in the workplace. This public policy is codified in the FEHA (California Government
26 Code §12940 et seq.). California also recognizes a public policy prohibiting retaliation against
27 employees for making complaints regarding discrimination in the workplace. This public policy is
28 codified in the FEHA (California Government Code §12940 et seq.) and the CFRA (California
11
1 Government Code § 12945.2 et seq.). It is a violation of California’s public policy against
2 discrimination and retaliation of any type or form, to terminate an employee for one or more
3 unlawful reasons, as it is to terminate an older worker once that older worker has complained about
4 discrimination against him in the workplace, as is the case here.
5 54. As a proximate result of the acts of Defendants, as described above, Plaintiff suffered
6 economic damages, including lost wages and benefits, and other compensatory damages in an
7 amount to be ascertained at the time of trial.
9 them, as alleged above, Plaintiff has suffered humiliation, mental anguish, and emotional and
10 physical distress, and has been injured in body and mind all to Plaintiff's damage in an amount to
11 be ascertained at the time of trial. As a proximate result of the acts of Defendants, as alleged above,
TEL 310.802.1500 • FAX 310.802.0500

12 Plaintiff has suffered physical and mental injuries and has necessarily expended sums in the
13 treatment of such injuries, all to Plaintiff’s damage in an amount to be ascertained at the time of
14 trial. As a further proximate result of the acts of Defendants, and each of them, as alleged above,
15 Plaintiff will necessarily continue to expend sums in the future for the treatment of the physical,
16 emotional and mental injuries sustained by Plaintiff as a result of said Defendants’ acts in an amount
17 to be ascertained at the time of trial.
24 PRAYER FOR RELIEF
25 WHEREFORE, Plaintiff James Reid Venable prays for the following relief and for
26 Judgment against Defendants, and each of them, to be determined by a jury, as follows:

27 For all Causes of Action,
28 / / /
12
1 1. General damages in an amount according to proof, but in excess of the minimum
2 jurisdiction of this Court;
3 2. For special damages in an amount according to proof, but in the excess of the
4 minimum jurisdiction of this court, to compensate the Plaintiff for Plaintiff's loss of
5 past and future earnings, and all damages flowing from Plaintiff’s loss of earnings,
6 loss of job security, failure to properly advance within Plaintiff's career, damage to
7 Plaintiff's reputation; and for loss of all future earnings and benefits and job
8 promotions and privileges Plaintiff would have had;
9 3. For consequential economic loss; but for the wrongful termination.
10 4. For all costs and disbursements incurred in this suit;
11 5. For all interest as allowed by law;

TEL 310.802.1500 • FAX 310.802.0500

12 6. Where available and proper for attorneys’ fees and costs incurred pursuing this
13 Complaint against Defendants;
14 7. For all emotional distress damages that properly compensate Plaintiff for Plaintiff's
15 pain and suffering as a result of Defendants’ actions as fully described in this
16 Complaint for damages;
17 8. For Injunctive Relief and Declaratory Relief in Accordance with Law;
18 9. For all applicable and appropriate exemplary and punitive damages; and,
19 10. All other relief the Court deems proper and appropriate.
20
DATED: December 28, 2023 BARRERA & ASSOCIATES
21
22
By: /s/ Patricio Barrera
23 Patricio Barrera
Attorneys for Plaintiff James Reid Venable
24
25
26
27
28
13
1 DEMAND FOR JURY TRIAL
2 Plaintiff hereby demands a trial by jury.

3
4 DATED: December 28, 2023 BARRERA & ASSOCIATES
5
6
By: /s/ Patricio Barrera
7 Patricio Barrera
Attorneys for Plaintiff James Reid Venable
8
9
10
11
TEL 310.802.1500 • FAX 310.802.0500

12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
14

James Venable V Activision Blizzard

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

James Venable V Activision Blizzard

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Description:

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

James Venable V Activision Blizzard

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

1 Patricio T.D.

Barrera, (SBN 149696)

9 FOR THE COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES

TEL 310.802.1500 • FAX 310.802.0500

12 Plaintiff, COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES ALLEGING:

13 vs. 1. RETALIATION (Labor Code §1102.5);

TEL 310.802.1500 • FAX 310.802.0500

12 Angeles, State of California.

13 3. Defendant ACTIVISION PUBLISHING, INC. is and at all times herein mentioned

9 7. Plaintiff exhausted his administrative remedies by filing complaints for

TEL 310.802.1500 • FAX 310.802.0500

17 8. Activision is an American multinational technology corporation that produces video

28 individual. Plaintiff was a covered employee under the FEHA.

TEL 310.802.1500 • FAX 310.802.0500

12 Facts Establishing Plaintiff’s Protected Activity and Defendants’ Wrongful, Discriminatory,

13 Retaliatory, and Illegal Conduct Giving Rise to This Complaint

TEL 310.802.1500 • FAX 310.802.0500

10 www.careers.activision.com, Linkedin.com, showbizjobs.com, indeed.com, and other, similar

TEL 310.802.1500 • FAX 310.802.0500

12 25. As a result of being wrongfully terminated for discriminatory and/or retaliatory

4 complaints and the adverse employment actions.

TEL 310.802.1500 • FAX 310.802.0500

27 and/or managing agent employees of Defendants acting in a despicable, oppressive, fraudulent,

6 AGE DISCRIMINATION (FEHA)

TEL 310.802.1500 • FAX 310.802.0500

Housing Act (“FEHA”).

8 reason, job elimination/restructuring is pretextual.

TEL 310.802.1500 • FAX 310.802.0500

TEL 310.802.1500 • FAX 310.802.0500

TEL 310.802.1500 • FAX 310.802.0500

12 engaging in similar despicable conduct.

13 FOURTH CAUSE OF ACTION

TEL 310.802.1500 • FAX 310.802.0500

26 Judgment against Defendants, and each of them, to be determined by a jury, as follows:

2 jurisdiction of this Court;

8 promotions and privileges Plaintiff would have had;

9 3. For consequential economic loss; but for the wrongful termination.

10 4. For all costs and disbursements incurred in this suit;

11 5. For all interest as allowed by law;

TEL 310.802.1500 • FAX 310.802.0500

13 Complaint against Defendants;

15 pain and suffering as a result of Defendants’ actions as fully described in this

16 Complaint for damages;

17 8. For Injunctive Relief and Declaratory Relief in Accordance with Law;

2 Plaintiff hereby demands a trial by jury.

TEL 310.802.1500 • FAX 310.802.0500

You might also like