Lawsuit Filed Against Western Iowa Tech Community College Over J-1 Visa Program
Lawsuit Filed Against Western Iowa Tech Community College Over J-1 Visa Program
Lawsuit Filed Against Western Iowa Tech Community College Over J-1 Visa Program
Plaintiffs,
v.
Defendants.
COME NOW Plaintiffs Jacqueline de Britto Bucco, Antonio Diego Barbosa Coutinho,
Ana Paula Oliveira de Souza Costa, Carilyns Sarai Camus Jorquera Jorquera, Vinicius Assad de
Magalhaes, Brian de Souza Melo, Marcos Vinicius Morais Pinto, Silmar Da Silva Reis, Cesar
Priester Rosa, Jr., Nestor Alonso Acevedo Contreras, and Leila Silva Freire Soares, and for their
Complaint against Defendants Western Iowa Tech Community College, Premier Services, Inc.
d/b/a J&L Staffing and Recruiting, Inc. and also d/b/a J&L Enterprises, Inc., Royal Canin USA,
Murrell, Terry Yi, James Zuercher, and Lilly Castro state as follows:
Protection Act, 18 U.S.C. §§ 1581, 1589, 1590, and 1595, The Fair Labor Standards Act, 29
U.S.C. § 201, The Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act, 18 U.S.C. § 1962, as
well as violations of state law including violations of the Iowa Wage Payment Collections Act,
tortious bad faith breach of contract or denial of contract, and tortious infliction of emotional
distress.
2. This Court has jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1331 as this is a civil action arising
3. Venue in the Northern District Court in Iowa is proper under 28 U.S.C. § 1391 as
a substantial part of the events or omissions giving rise to this claim occurred in Woodbury
County, Iowa.
PARTIES
4. At all times material hereto, Plaintiff Jacqueline de Britto Bucco (“Bucco”) was a
citizen of Brazil, a resident of Woodbury County, Iowa, and a participant in the J-1 Visa
Program at WITCC.
(“Coutinho”) was a citizen of Brazil, a resident of Woodbury County, Iowa, and a participant in
was a citizen of Brazil, a resident of Woodbury County, Iowa, and a participant in the J-1 Visa
Program at WITCC.
7. At all times material hereto, Plaintiff Carilyns Sarai Camus Jorquera (“Jorquera”)
was a citizen of Chile, a resident of Woodbury County, Iowa, and a participant in the J-1 Visa
Program at WITCC.
was a citizen of Brazil, a resident of Woodbury County, Iowa, and a participant in the J-1 Visa
Program at WITCC.
9. At all times material hereto, Plaintiff Brian de Souza Melo (“Melo”) was a citizen
of Brazil, a resident of Woodbury County, Iowa, and a participant in the J-1 Visa Program at
WITCC.
10. At all times material hereto, Plaintiff Marcos Vinicius Morais Pinto (“Pinto”) was
a citizen of Brazil, a resident of Woodbury County, Iowa, and a participant in the J-1 Visa
Program at WITCC.
11. At all times material hereto, Plaintiff Silmar Da Silva Reis (“Reis”) was a citizen
of Brazil, a resident of Woodbury County, Iowa, and a participant in the J-1 Visa Program at
WITCC.
12. At all times material hereto, Plaintiff Cesar Priester Rosa, Jr. (“Rosa”) was a
citizen of Brazil, a resident of Woodbury County, Iowa, and a participant in the J-1 Visa
Program at WITCC.
13. At all times material hereto, Plaintiff Nestor Alonso Acevedo Contreras
(“Contreras”) was a citizen of Chile, a resident of Woodbury County, Iowa, and a participant in
14. At all times material hereto, Plaintiff Leila Silva Freire Soares (“Soares”) was a
citizen of Brazil, a resident of Woodbury County, Iowa, and a participant in the J-1 Visa
Program at WITCC.
15. At all times material hereto, Defendant Western Iowa Tech Community College
(“WITCC”), was a public community college organized and existing under the laws of the State
16. At all times material hereto, Premier Services, Inc. d/b/a J&L Staffing and
Recruiting, Inc. and also d/b/a J&L Enterprises, Inc. (collectively, “J&L Staffing”), was an Iowa
17. At all times material hereto, Defendant Royal Canin USA, Inc. (“Royal Canin”)
was a Virginia corporation, with its principal place of business in St. Charles, Missouri, and a
plant location in North Sioux City, South Dakota where it manufactures high-end pet food.
18. At all times material hereto, Defendant Tur-Pak Foods, Inc. (“Tur-Pak”) was an
Iowa corporation, with its principal place of business in Sioux City, Iowa where it packs and
19. At all times material hereto, Defendant Juline Albert was a United States citizen,
20. At all times material hereto, Defendant Nancy Albrecht was a United States
21. At all times material hereto, Defendant Rosana Salgado Burright was a United
States citizen, a resident of Sioux City, Iowa, an employee of WITCC, and worked as an
23. At all times material hereto, Defendant Terry Yi was a United States citizen, a
24. At all times material hereto, Defendant James Zuercher was a United States
25. At all times material hereto, Defendant Lilly Castro was a United States citizen, a
26. Plaintiffs were all participants in the Federal J-1 Visa Program at WITCC.
27. Defendants represented to Plaintiffs that the Federal J-1 Visa Program at WITCC
was a two-year program in which Plaintiffs would study at WITCC and complete internships
related to their field of study and at which they would work no more than 32 hours per week.
28. After Plaintiffs arrived in the United States, they were assigned jobs at
29. The jobs to which Plaintiffs were assigned had no educational value and were
30. Plaintiffs were expected to work more than the 32 hours a week they had been
31. Defendants told Plaintiffs that if they were unable to work due to illness, they
would be removed from the J-1 Visa Program and sent home to their native country.
32. Defendants Royal Canin and Tur-Pak paid $15 per hour for the labor Plaintiffs
provided, yet Plaintiffs, themselves, received only $7.25 per hour. The rest of their earnings were
33. Plaintiffs were enrolled in classes at WITCC but kept segregated from the general
student population and took classes only with other Brazilians and Chileans who were part of the
34. In November 2019, an anonymous complaint was made which resulted in the U.S.
35. On November 19, 2019, the State Department interviewed several of the students
36. After the State Department completed their interviews, Plaintiffs lost their jobs at
37. Because they were no longer working, Plaintiffs did not have money to buy food.
38. Defendant WITCC ended the J-1 Visa Program in January 2020 and asked the
39. Plaintiff Bucco learned about the J-1 Visa Program at WITCC through a friend in
40. Plaintiff Bucco applied and was accepted into the program.
41. Defendant Burright told Plaintiff Bucco that she would receive free housing and
42. When Plaintiff Bucco first arrived in the U.S., WITCC was providing the J-1 Visa
43. After the J-1 Visa students started working, WITCC stopped giving the students
44. Plaintiff Bucco’s intended field of study at WITCC was Culinary Arts.
45. Plaintiff was told by Defendant Burright she would be studying at WITCC and
46. Plaintiff Bucco worked at Tur-Pak. She was paid $7.25 per hour and worked more
47. Plaintiff Bucco changed her field of study to Robotics and Automation and then
48. Plaintiff Bucco’s job was to package pet food. She was paid $7.25 per hour for
49. In January 2020, Plaintiff Bucco was told by Defendant Albert (with Defendants
Burright and Murrell present) she could no longer work at Royal Canin due to the anonymous
50. Defendant WITCC then hired Plaintiff Bucco for a job doing administrative work.
51. Plaintiff Bucco was paid $7.25 per hour by Defendant WITCC to perform
52. Plaintiff Bucco worked doing administrative work for WITCC until it ended the J-
1 Visa Program.
53. Plaintiff Coutinho learned about Defendant WITCC’s J-1 Visa Program from a
54. Plaintiff Coutinho reached out to Defendant Burright, who sent him information
55. Plaintiff Coutinho’s intended field of study at WITCC was Robotics and
Automation.
56. Plaintiff Coutinho was told he would be studying at WITCC and working 36
hours per week at Defendant Royal Canin as a robotics and automation technician. He was also
told he would not pay any fees to WITCC and his housing and food would be provided.
57. Plaintiff Coutinho’s job at Royal Canin was unrelated to the field of Robotics and
Automation.
58. Plaintiff Coutinho worked carrying 50 lb. bags of rice and meat to a mixer that
59. Plaintiff Coutinho worked more than 36 hours a week, often working up to 52
60. Plaintiff Coutinho was paid $7.25 per hour for his work at Royal Canin. His
American co-workers told him they were earning approximately $18 - $18.25 per hour for the
same work.
61. In March 2020, Plaintiff Coutinho moved out of the student housing at WITCC
62. Plaintiff Costa learned about the J-1 Visa Program via a Facebook post.
63. Plaintiff Costa’s intended field of study was Culinary Arts and Food Services.
64. Prior to arriving in the U.S., Plaintiff Costa was told she would be working a
maximum of 35 hours per week in a job which was related to food service.
65. Plaintiff Costa was told that the job she would be placed in could be in a factory,
66. Plaintiff Costa was not placed in a job related to food service, but instead worked
67. Royal Canin paid $15 per hour for Plaintiff Costa’s work, but she only received
68. In March 2020, Plaintiff Costa moved out of the student housing at WITCC
69. Plaintiff Jorquera learned about Defendant WITCC’s J-1 Visa Program via a post
on Facebook. After seeing the post, Plaintiff Jorquera reached out to Carlos Espinoza and
Defendant Burright who helped Plaintiff Jorquera through the application process.
70. Plaintiff Jorquera applied and was accepted into the J-1 Visa Program.
71. Plaintiff Jorquera was recruited for the Culinary Arts program.
72. Plaintiff Jorquera had no interest in studying Culinary Arts or Robotics and
Automation but was told she could change her field of study once she arrived at WITCC.
73. Plaintiff Jorquera was unable to be placed at Defendant Royal Canin or Defendant
Tur-Pak because there was a delay with her social security card.
74. Defendant WITCC gave Plaintiff Jorquera jobs on campus which included
translating in the Robotics classes for other Chilean students and working in the mailroom.
75. Plaintiff Jorquera was paid $7.25 per hour for her jobs at WITCC.
76. Plaintiff Jorquera discovered WITCC was deducting money from her paycheck.
77. Plaintiff Jorquera asked WITCC employees why money was being deducted from
her paycheck because it was her understanding she did not have to pay any fees for her tuition or
78. Plaintiff Jorquera discovered WITCC was receiving $10 per hour for the work she
was doing on campus. She was told that money was to pay fees for the program.
79. In November 2019, Plaintiff Jorquera became ill and was unable to work. She lost
80. After three weeks of unemployment, Defendant WITCC gave Plaintiff Jorquera a
81. Plaintiff Jorquera asked Defendant Albert if she could get a job at Wal-Mart to
help cover costs from being unemployed and medical bills from when she was sick.
82. Defendant Albert told Plaintiff Jorquera she could find a job off campus. Plaintiff
83. When Defendant Burright discovered Plaintiff Jorquera had found a job off
campus, she told Plaintiff Jorquera she would need to give portions of her paycheck from Wal-
84. When WITCC ended the J-1 Visa Program in March 2020, Plaintiff Jorquera
85. Plaintiff Magalhaes learned about the J-1 Visa Program via a Facebook page. He
contacted Defendant Burright who assisted him in applying for the program.
86. Plaintiff Magalhaes’s intended field of study was Robotics and Automation.
87. Plaintiff Magalhaes was told he would be working at Royal Cain, and his job
88. Plaintiff Magalhaes worked at Royal Canin as an Operator. This position was
10
89. There were weeks Plaintiff Magalhaes worked over 54 hours per week even
though he understood the maximum number of work hours was 40 hours per week.
90. In November 2019, Plaintiff Magalhaes was told he could no longer work at
Royal Canin due to the anonymous complaint that was made to the State Department.
92. In December 2019, Plaintiff Magalhaes found a job at Firehouse Subs. When
Defendant WITCC found out he was working outside of the program he was told he had to quit.
93. Plaintiff Magalhaes left WITCC housing in March 2020 after WITCC ended the
94. Plaintiff Melo learned about the J-1 Visa program via a Facebook post from
Defendant Burright. Plaintiff Melo’s grandmother knew Defendant Burright from church, so he
95. Defendant Burright’s Facebook post represented the J-1 Visa Program as a 2-year
program in which students could study and work in an internship related to their field of study.
96. Plaintiff Melo’s intended field of study was Robotics and Automation.
97. Plaintiff Melo was told he would be studying and working in a job related to
Robotics and Automation. He was told he would be working 35 hours per week.
98. Initially, Plaintiff Melo worked at Defendant Tur-Pak because there were no
99. Plaintiff Melo was paid $7.25 for his work at Tur-Pak. In addition to taxes,
11
Students.
100. Plaintiff Melo’s work was completely unrelated to robotics and automation.
101. After some time working at Tur-Pak, Plaintiff Melo was offered a position at
Royal Canin because another J-1 Visa student had been fired for missing work due to illness.
102. Plaintiff Melo was paid $7.25 per hour for his work at Royal Canin.
103. In November 2019, Plaintiff Melo was told he could no longer work at Royal
104. Plaintiff Melo looked for other jobs outside of the J-1 Visa Program because he
105. Plaintiff Melo found a job at Hy-Vee but was told by Defendant Albert that he
106. In February 2020, Defendant WITCC offered Plaintiff Melo a position as a Social
Justice intern.
107. In March 2020, Defendant WITCC told Plaintiff Melo and the other J-1 Students
that they were ending the program and the students would be sent home.
108. Plaintiff Melo left WITCC housing in March 2020 after WITCC ended the J-1
Visa Program.
109. Plaintiff Pinto’s intended field of study was Robotics and Automation. He was
110. Plaintiff Pinto was placed at Royal Canin for work. He was very disappointed
12
112. Plaintiff Pinto’s work schedule was unpredictable. He would work anywhere from
36-56 hours per week. He would often work 12 days in a row and would work double shifts on
weekends.
113. Plaintiff Pinto was paid $7.25 per hour for his work at Royal Canin.
114. Plaintiff Pinto was aware Royal Canin was paying $15 per hour for his labor, and
115. Plaintiff Pinto left WITCC housing in March 2020 after WITCC ended the J-1
Visa Program.
116. Plaintiff Reis learned of the J-1 Visa Program via a Facebook post from
Defendant Burright.
117. Plaintiff Reis’s intended field of study was Robotics and Automation.
118. When Plaintiff Reis inquired about the program, Defendant Burright told him it
was a two-year program which would allow Plaintiff Reis to study Robotics and Automation and
119. Plaintiff Reis was told he would be working around 30 hours per week at Royal
Canin as a robotics technician. Plaintiff Reis was familiar with Royal Canin and was hopeful
120. Plaintiff Reis’s job at Royal Canin was not related to the field of robotics. Rather
than working with robotics, Plaintiff Reis worked with high risk ingredients. He handled 50 lb.
13
122. Plaintiff Reis was paid $7.25 per hour for his work at Royal Canin.
123. Plaintiff Reis left WITCC housing in March 2020 after WITCC ended the J-1
Visa Program.
124. Plaintiff Rosa learned about the J-1 Visa program through a friend and a
125. The Facebook post described the program as a 2-year program in which students
could study and work in a field related to their studies. The post said fees and housing would be
paid for.
127. Plaintiff Rosa was told he would be working at Defendant Royal Canin.
128. Plaintiff Rosa thought he would be working in a position related to robotics and
129. Plaintiff Rosa worked in the cooler moving 50 lb. blocks of frozen meat which
130. Plaintiff Rosa also worked in the mixing room processing pet food and in
packaging.
132. Despite being told he would be working 32 hours per week, Plaintiff Rosa worked
133. After the anonymous complaint to the State Department, Plaintiff Rosa was told
14
134. Plaintiff Rosa could not afford food without the income he was receiving from
135. Plaintiff Rosa left WITCC housing in March 2020 after WITCC ended the J-1
Visa Program.
136. Plaintiff Acevedo learned about the J-1 Visa Program at WITCC via a Facebook
138. Plaintiff Acevedo thought he would be working in a job related to Culinary Arts.
139. Plaintiff Acevedo was told by Defendants that he would receive free housing and
food. In the beginning, Plaintiff Acevedo was given Walmart gift cards to purchase food, but
140. Plaintiff worked at Defendant Tur-Pak packaging food. Plaintiff had to unload
boxes of meats and put them in the refrigerator and manage the delivery of them to the
production lines.
141. Plaintiff received only $7.25 per hour for his work at Tur-Pak.
142. Plaintiff Acevedo asked by Defendants took money he earned from his
paychecks. They told him it was because he had to reimburse them for his plane ticket to Iowa
144. Defendants threatened Plaintiff that if he did not work, he would be removed from
the program. At one point, he broke a tooth while working but did not go to the dentist out of
15
145. Plaintiff Acevedo left WITCC housing in March 2020 after WITCC ended the J-1
Visa Program.
146. Plaintiff Soares learned about the J-1 Visa Program at WITCC via a Facebook
148. Plaintiff Soares thought she would be working in a job related to Culinary Arts.
149. Plaintiff worked at Defendant Tur-Pak packaging food. The work environment at
Tur-Pak was very cold, and Plaintiff was not given proper attire to wear while working in the
freezer.
151. Plaintiff was paid $7.25 per hour for her work at Tur-Pak. Defendant Tur-Pak
deducted $40 per week from her paycheck for transportation costs.
152. Plaintiff Soares left WITCC housing in March 2020 after WITCC ended the J-1
Visa Program.
153. By recruiting Plaintiffs for WITCC’s J-1 Visa Program, Defendants recruited,
16
b. The WITCC Defendants received a kickback for each hour of labor performed
by Plaintiffs.
c. Defendant J&L Staffing benefited by obtaining employees who could not quit
or even take a sick day for fear of legal repercussions (e.g., deportation) and
155. Defendants told Plaintiffs the J-1 Visa Program was an educational cultural
exchange program, and that they would study and work in an internship related to their field of
study.
156. Defendants knowingly placed Plaintiffs in unskilled labor positions, which are not
permitted under the J-1 Visa Program requirements, rather than placing them in internships
157. Defendants Royal Canin and Tur-Pak paid Defendants WITCC and J&L Staffing
158. Defendants knowingly obtained the labor and services of Plaintiffs by means of
159. Defendants expected Plaintiffs to work excruciating hours, to work while sick,
a. That all Defendants be prohibited and enjoined from any further participation
17
opportunities promised to them, compensation for the past and future mental
and emotional harm and anguish, moneys paid during the recruitment process
and expenses incurred to travel to and from the United States, repayment of
f. That Plaintiffs be awarded such additional and further relief as is just and
appropriate.
160. At all times relevant to this complaint, Plaintiffs were employed by Defendants
161. At all times relevant to this complaint, Defendants Royal Canin and Tur-Pak were
162. Defendants Royal Canin and Tur-Pak failed to pay Plaintiffs all wages due and
failed to pay Plaintiffs time and a half for hours exceeding 40 per week.
WHEREFORE, Plaintiffs demand judgment against Defendants Royal Canin and Tur-
Pak for unpaid wages, liquidated damages, prejudment and postjudgment interest, court costs,
163. Plaintiffs were employees within the meaning of Iowa Code Chapter 91A.
164. Defendant Royal Canin was an employer within the meaning of Iowa Code
18
165. Defendant Tur-Pak was an employer within the meaning of Iowa Code Chapter
91A.
167. Defendants Royal Canin and Tur-Pak failed to pay Plaintiff all wages due,
including but not limited to, time and a half for hours exceeding 40 per week.
WHEREFORE, Plaintiffs demand judgment against Defendants Royal Canin and Tur-
Pak for unpaid wages, liquidated damages, prejudgment and postjudgment interest, court costs,
168. At all times material to this complaint, Defendants WITCC, Royal Canin, Tur-
169. Defendants WITCC and J&L Staffing sent representatives to Chile and Brazil to
recruit students for the J-1 Visa Program, which they represented as a cultural exchange
program.
170. Defendants WITCC and J&L Staffing told Plaintiffs they would be studying at
171. Defendants WITCC and J&L Staffing then placed Plaintiffs in unskilled labor
172. Plaintiffs were paid significantly less than American employees in the same
173. The Defendants’ ongoing business relationship meets the requirements for a
19
174. Forced labor and trafficking for forced labor constitutes racketeering activity as
that term is defined in 18 U.S.C. § 1961(1)(B). Forced labor and trafficking for forced labor
satisfies the requirements for a RICO predicate act and for a nexus with interstate commerce.
176. Defendants have conducted and have conspired to conduct the affairs of the RICO
enterprise through a pattern of racketeering activity in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 1962(c) and (d).
177. As a direct result of Defendants’ actions, Plaintiffs have sustained injuries and
damages.
a. That all Defendants be prohibited and enjoined from any further participation
moneys paid during the recruitment process and expenses incurred to travel to
and from the United States, repayment of deductions withheld from Plaintiffs’
f. That Plaintiffs be awarded such additional and further relief as is just and
appropriate.
20
178. Defendants WITCC, J&L Staffing, Royal Canin, and Tur-Pak agreed to
179. Defendants WITCC, J&L Staffing, Royal Canin, and Tur-Pak agreed to the
overall objective of the conspiracy or agreed with at least one other Defendant to commit two
180. Defendants WITCC, J&L Staffing, Royal Canin, and Tur-Pak agreed to the
overall objective of recruiting Plaintiffs for unskilled labor positions under the guise of having
181. Defendants WITCC, J&L Staffing, Royal Canin, and Tur-Pak agreed to the
statements.
b. J&L Staffing then placed the recruited Plaintiffs at Defendants Royal Canin
excluded from participating in the federal J-1 Visa Program and in which
182. As a direct result of Defendants’ actions, Plaintiffs have sustained injuries and
21
a. That all Defendants be prohibited and enjoined from any further participation
paid during the recruitment process and expenses incurred to travel to and
g. That Plaintiffs be awarded such additional and further relief as is just and
appropriate.
work, including:
a. Threatening to revoke their J-1 Visas and deport them if they missed work.
b. Threatening them with large amounts of debt owed if they missed work.
22
e. Dictating when and where Plaintiffs could work, and under what conditions, in
including:
186. Defendants took advantage of the natural isolation that occurred because Plaintiffs
187. As a result of these conditions, Plaintiffs had no real choice but to work for the
188. Once Plaintiffs were brought to the United States and indebted to Defendants,
189. Defendants, through their agents, servants, and employees in their official
official decisions, or usages which unconstitutionally deprived Plaintiffs of their rights against
23
191. Defendants deprived Plaintiffs of the rights guaranteed to them under the
a. That all Defendants be prohibited and enjoined from any further participation
paid during the recruitment process and expenses incurred to travel to and
g. That Plaintiffs be awarded such additional and further relief as is just and
appropriate.
192. The Iowa Constitution guarantees that no person shall be deprived of life, liberty
193. The Iowa Constitution strictly prohibits slavery or involuntary servitude, unless
24
capacities, deprived Plaintiffs of procedural and substantive due process, through policy, practice
and/or custom, when recklessly and/or intentionally subjecting them to human and labor
trafficking, coercing them to work for Defendants’ benefit, isolating and controlling their
movements and sources of financial independence, and threatening them with deportation or
195. Defendants deprived Plaintiffs of their rights without notice and opportunity to be
heard.
and will continue to economic injury, past and future pain and suffering, and other damages in an
199. Defendants’ actions perpetrated against Plaintiffs were done in reckless disregard
for the rights of Plaintiffs, entitling them to punitive damages pursuant to Iowa Code Section
668A.1. Punitive damages are necessary to vindicate Plaintiffs’ infringed rights of privacy and/or
dignity. Godfrey v. State, 898 N.W.2d 844, 881 (Iowa 2017) (Cady, J., dissenting in part,
concurring in part).
a. That all Defendants be prohibited and enjoined from any further participation
25
paid during the recruitment process and expenses incurred to travel to and
g. That Plaintiffs be awarded such additional and further relief as is just and
appropriate.
exchange study program in which they would study and work at a job related to their field of
201. The Defendants’ representation of WITCC’s Federal J-1 Visa Program was false
as the Plaintiffs’ jobs held no educational value and were unrelated to their field of study.
202. The Defendants’ representations were material as the Plaintiffs made the decision
to participate in the J-1 Visa Program based on the representations that they would be receiving
203. Defendants knew the representations about WITCC’s J-1 Visa Program were
false.
205. The Plaintiffs acted in reliance on the truth of the representations and were
26
207. As a result of Defendants’ actions, Plaintiffs have sustained injuries and damages,
including but not limited to economic injury, past and future pain and suffering, and other
208. Defendants’ actions against Plaintiffs were willful and wanton and done with
malice or in reckless disregard of the rights of Plaintiffs, entitling them to punitive damages.
WHEREFORE, Plaintiffs demand judgment against all Defendants, jointly and severally,
in an amount that will fully and fairly compensate them for their injuries and damages, punitive
damages in an amount sufficient to punish Defendants and to deter them and others from
engaging in the same or similar wrongful conduct in the future, court costs, prejudgment and
postjudgment interest, and for such other appropriate relief as the Court finds just and
appropriate.
209. Defendants made untrue assertions, believing them to be true, by consistently and
falsely representing to Plaintiffs that the J-1 Visa Program at WITCC was a cultural exchange
program in which Plaintiffs would study and gain hands-on experience related to their field of
study.
210. Defendants committed a breach of duty which, without intent to deceive, allowed
211. The representations made by Defendants were material to the ability of any
prospective J-1 Visa Program participant to decide whether to accept placement in the program.
27
214. Defendants knew or should have known that the representations made to Plaintiffs
were false.
215. The Plaintiffs justifiably acted in reliance on the representations that they would
receive education and professional work experience in their field of study by participating in the
216. In making such representations, Defendants were negligent in one or more of the
following particulars:
Plaintiffs’ wages.
per week.
218. Plaintiffs subsequently discovered that they were not being placed in internships
related to their field of study, that they were required to work more than 32 hours per week, and
28
WHEREFORE, Plaintiffs demand judgment against all Defendants, jointly and severally,
in an amount that will fully and fairly compensate them for their injuries and damages, court
costs, prejudment and postjudgment interest, and for such other relief as the Court finds just and
appropriate.
220. Defendants benefitted from Plaintiffs working because they did not fully
223. As a result of Defendants’ actions, Plaintiffs have suffered economic injury, pain
224. Defendants’ actions against Plaintiffs were willful and wanton and done with
malice or in reckless disregard of the rights and safety of Plaintiffs, entitling them to punitive
damages.
WHEREFORE, Plaintiffs demand judgment against all Defendants, jointly and severally,
in an amount that will fully and fairly compensate them for their injuries and damages, for
punitive damages in an amount sufficient to punish Defendants and to deter them and others
from similar wrongful conduct in the future, court costs, prejudment and postjudment interest,
and for such other relief as the Court finds just and appropriate.
225. On June 3, 2019, Defendant WITCC entered into a written contract with
29
reference.
226. By the terms of the contracts, Defendant WITCC agreed to provide Plaintiffs with
an educational and cultural exchange experience through the J-1 Visa Program.
227. Under the terms of the contracts, the Defendant WITCC and Plaintiffs agreed to
the following:
a. Plaintiffs would participate in the J-1 Visa Program for the duration of one
supplies.
d. Defendant WITCC would supply Plaintiffs with all necessary materials for
e. Plaintiffs could not obtain paid internships off campus without permission
a. Plaintiffs were not provided with internships related to their field of study.
c. Defendant WITCC made secret deductions from Plaintiffs’ wages that they
claim were used to pay for Plaintiffs’ tuition, fees, and housing at WITCC.
229. Defendant’s failure to perform obligations under the contracts has damaged
30
a. Plaintiffs were not given the education and professional skills they were
promised.
b. Plaintiffs were not fully compensated for the unskilled work they were
c. Plaintiffs’ mental and physical health suffered due to the excessive hours they
230. As a result of Defendant’s actions, Plaintiffs have sustained injuries and damages.
will fully and fairly compensate them for their injuries and damages, court costs, prejudment and
postjudgment interest, and for such other relief as the Court finds just and appropriate.
231. The Plaintiffs’ motivation for entering into the contracts with the Defendant
WITCC was to gain educational and professional experience in their chosen field of study.
232. Ordinary contract damages are not adequate for the breach of the contracts at
issue because they do not account for the Defendant’s superior position and they do not make the
through a cultural exchange J-1 Visa, Plaintiffs were especially vulnerable to harm of breach due
to being young, far away from their native countries, and navigating a new country, and therefore
235. Defendant WITCC breached its written contracts to provide Plaintiffs with
31
236. Defendant WITCC breached its written contracts to provide the J-1 Visa Pogram
237. Defendant WITCC’s breach of contract was in bad faith in that Defendant had no
238. Defendant’s breach of its written contracts with Plaintiffs was the proximate
239. Defendant WITCC knew it lacked a reasonable basis for denying the existence of
such contracts or acted in reckless disregard for the lack of reasonable basis.
240. The failure and refusal of Defendant WITCC to perform its obligations under the
contracts has damaged Plaintiffs financially and caused them substantial economic and
emotional harm.
241. Defendant WITCC’s actions perpetrated against Plaintiffs were willful and
wanton and done with malice or in reckless disregard of the rights and safety of Plaintiffs,
will fully and fairly compensate Plaintiffs for their damages, for punitive damages in an amount
sufficient to punish Defendant and to deter it and others from engaging in similar wrongful
conduct in the future; court costs, prejudgment and postjudment interest, and such other relief as
242. Defendants’ unlawful acts and omissions went beyond the bounds of decency and
32
244. Defendants knew their conduct would cause severe physical, psychological,
and/or emotional harm, and they acted with intentional and/or reckless disregard for causing that
harm.
including but not limited to past and future severe mental and emotional harm and anguish, pain
246. Defendants’ actions perpetrated against Plaintiffs were willful and wanton and
done with malice or in reckless disregard of the rights and safety of Plaintiffs, entitling them to
punitive damages.
fully and fairly compensate Plaintiffs for their damages, for punitive damages in an amount
sufficient to punish Defendants and to deter them and others from engaging in similar wrongful
conduct in the future; court costs, prejudgment and postjudment interest, and such other relief as
JURY DEMAND
33
34