Doe v. DOL-OSHA: Court Dismisses Claims Over OSHA Investigation

John Doe 1 filed a lawsuit against the United States Department of Labor – Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA), Lincoln Premium Poultry, Signal Security, and several OSHA officials following events related to a workplace safety complaint. Doe was employed by Lincoln Premium Poultry and reported safety hazards at the facility, including chemical exposure, equipment issues, and other dangerous conditions.

OSHA initiated a safety inspection and a whistleblower investigation. OSHA investigators Sarah J. Linthacum and Kristina Carignan were assigned to the matter. During the investigation, Doe alleged that OSHA required him to produce confidential documents and warned that his complaint could be dismissed if he did not comply. Doe did not provide the requested materials and maintained that doing so would compromise protected information. 

Doe also alleged that OSHA failed to conduct a site visit, did not interview key witnesses, and did not meaningfully investigate the reported hazards. During the same period, Lincoln Premium Poultry conducted its own internal review and determined that Doe’s complaints were unfounded. The OSHA safety complaint was later closed. 

Claims Filed by Doe

Doe asserted claims seeking a writ of mandamus to compel OSHA and the Office of Special Counsel to conduct investigations. He also sought damages from the OSHA investigators in their individual capacities, declaratory relief based on alleged violations of federal law and constitutional rights, and injunctive relief requiring further investigation and preservation of evidence.

Court’s Analysis

The court conducted an initial review of the amended complaint under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2). The court evaluated whether Doe’s allegations stated a claim upon which relief could be granted.

The court determined that OSHA’s decision to investigate workplace complaints is discretionary and does not create a clear right to an investigation. Based on this, the court found that Doe was not entitled to a writ of mandamus requiring OSHA or the Office of Special Counsel to act.

The court also addressed Doe’s claim for damages against the OSHA investigators. It determined that OSHA and its regulations do not create a private right of action against investigators. The court further found that Doe failed to state a viable constitutional claim because he did not allege a personal injury or risk of harm resulting from the alleged failure to investigate.

The court reviewed Doe’s request for declaratory relief and concluded that he did not establish entitlement to such relief. The court found that he could not assert a private right of action under OSHA and did not sufficiently allege violations under the Administrative Procedure Act, the Americans with Disabilities Act, or the Rehabilitation Act.

The court also addressed the request for injunctive relief. It found that Doe did not allege a real or immediate threat of future harm, particularly because he was no longer employed at the facility. The court also dismissed claims against Lincoln Premium Poultry and Signal Security, finding that Doe failed to state a claim against those entities.

Court’s Decision

The court dismissed the case without prejudice after determining that Doe failed to state a claim upon which relief could be granted. 

OSHA Safety Legal Support

If you are dealing with workplace safety concerns or OSHA-related issues, our team handles matters involving OSHA compliance, workplace safety disputes, and related employment issues. Contact us to learn how our team can assist with your situation.