1

COMPLAINT
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
B
o
n
a
g
o
f
s
k
y

&

W
e
i
s
s

A
t
t
o
r
n
e
y
s

a
t

L
a
w


SCOTT BONAGOFSKY (SBN: 190255)
ELIZABETH R. WEISS (SBN: 209181)
BONAGOFSKY & WEISS
111 Deerwood Road, Suite 200
San Ramon, CA 94583
Tel: (415) 882-1555
Fax: (415) 882-1551

Attorneys for Plaintiff SUSAN VINCI-LUCERO


SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA

COUNTY OF SANTA CLARA

UNLIMITED JURISDICTION



SUSAN VINCI-LUCERO,

Plaintiff,

vs.

VISTO CORPORATION dba GOOD
TECHNOLOGY, a Delaware corporation;
JIM MOISE, an individual,
and DOES 1 through 100, inclusive,

Defendants.
Case No.:

COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES AND
INJUNCTIVE RELIEF FOR: (1)
FAILURE TO ENGAGE IN
INTERACTIVE PROCESS (FEHA); (2)
FAILURE TO ACCOMMODATE
DISABILITY (FEHA); (3) DISABILITY
DISCRIMINATION (FEHA); (4)
HARASSMENT BASED UPON
DISABILITY; (5) RETALIATION
(FEHA/CFRA); (6) FAILURE TO
PREVENT, INVESTIGATE, AND
REMEDY DISCRIMINATION,
HARASSMENT, AND RETALIATION;
(7) INTERFERENCE WITH RIGHTS
UNDER CFRA; (8) WRONGFUL
TERMINATION IN VIOLATION OF
PUBLIC POLICY; (9)
CONSTRUCTIVE DISCHARGE IN
VIOLATION OF PUBLIC POLICY

JURY TRIAL DEMANDED


Plaintiff SUSAN VINCI-LUCERO (hereinafter “Plaintiff”) brings this action against
Defendant VISTO CORPORATION dba GOOD TECHNOLOGY (referred to herein as
“GOOD”); Defendant JIM MOISE (referred to herein as “MOISE”), an individual; and Does 1
to 100, inclusive, for damages, injunctive relief, costs, and attorneys’ fees, resulting from
Defendants’ unlawful and tortious conduct, and therefore alleges:

2
COMPLAINT
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
B
o
n
a
g
o
f
s
k
y

&

W
e
i
s
s

A
t
t
o
r
n
e
y
s

a
t

L
a
w

INTRODUCTORY STATEMENT OF THE CASE
1. Until she was wrongfully terminated while undergoing chemotherapy treatment
for stage 3 breast cancer, Plaintiff SUSAN VINCI-LUCERO was the Senior Vice President of
Marketing and highest ranking female employee at Defendant VISTO CORPORATION.
VISTO CORPORATION is a 500+-employee secure mobile communications software company
based in Sunnyvale. It does business and markets its products under the fictitious business
names “GOOD TECHNOLOGY” and “GOOD.”
2. Plaintiff was hand-picked for her role as SVP of Marketing by King Lee, Chief
Executive Officer of GOOD, who aggressively pursued her for the position. Plaintiff quickly
proved to be the right person for the job. She worked tirelessly and delivered outstanding
results, leading a marketing department that expanded from 12 to nearly 50 employees within a
year and a half, acting as a key driver of GOOD’s growth story, and receiving glowing praise
from her peers, including one email she received the day after her cancer diagnosis (but
before she informed the company of her diagnosis), in which David Satterwhite, GOOD’s Vice
President and General Manager, Americas, told Plaintiff, “Your team is doing an amazing job
Susan. Thanks.” Plaintiff was well liked by her peers and respected by her team members.
3. At the end of 2011, after her first full year on the job, GOOD recognized Plaintiff
for her performance with a bonus equal to 50% of her salary, the highest bonus possible under
her employment contract. No one ever complained to her about her performance – not in
writing, not in email, not verbally, or otherwise.
4. GOOD’s positive attitude toward Plaintiff changed when she returned from
surgery following her breast cancer. Three days after coming back from her surgery, Plaintiff’s
supervisor, Defendant MOISE, informed her that there was confusion among her team as to
whom people should be reporting, and that her comings and goings for her medical appointments
were disruptive, confusing to her team, and “bad for business.”
5. MOISE instructed Plaintiff that she was to remain at home and not to work until
she was finished with her chemotherapy and radiation treatments, all of which would take
approximately five months. Plaintiff memorialized MOISE’s conduct and statements in an email

3
COMPLAINT
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
B
o
n
a
g
o
f
s
k
y

&

W
e
i
s
s

A
t
t
o
r
n
e
y
s

a
t

L
a
w

to Debbie Shotwell, GOOD’s Vice President of Global Human Resources, and to MOISE, on
May 22, 2012, and objected to this unlawful conduct. The next day, CEO King Lee telephoned
Plaintiff while she was in the middle of a chemotherapy appointment and angrily berated her on
the telephone, stating that he wanted to talk to her.
6. The next day, Plaintiff telephoned Ms. Shotwell about the angry telephone call
she had received from CEO Lee. Ms. Shotwell reacted immediately, telling Plaintiff
emphatically not to talk to CEO Lee, that there was no reason to respond to him, they had told
her not to work, and that “it was settled.”
7. On or about July 11, 2012, while she was still undergoing chemotherapy, GOOD
tried surreptitiously to trick Plaintiff into waiving her right to jury trial by slipping an arbitration
clause into a new employee handbook, which it emailed to Plaintiff. Plaintiff did not agree to
the arbitration clause.
8. On July 18, 2012, a week after GOOD tried to sneak the arbitration agreement
into its new employee handbook, Ms. Shotwell asked Plaintiff via her executive assistant to meet
her for lunch on July 26, 2012. At the last minute, Plaintiff learned that CEO Lee would be
attending the lunch.
9. At the July 26, 2012 lunch, Lee asked Ms. Shotwell to leave him and Plaintiff
alone. When they were alone, Lee informed Plaintiff that it was “time for you to go,” that she
needed to leave the company, and that the company had prepared a severance package for her.
Plaintiff requested the severance offer in writing.
10. On July 26, 2012, Debbie Shotwell emailed Plaintiff the rough terms of a
severance package. She asked Plaintiff to give GOOD her response within the next 1-2 weeks
“so that there is closure.” No mention was made of any alternatives to Plaintiff having been
terminated. A true and correct copy of this email is attached hereto as Exhibit A.
11. On July 31, 2012, Plaintiff responded that she needed additional time to consider
her options and requested her personnel file and other employment-related documents. This
request apparently prompted GOOD to put things in the hands of its lawyers, who apparently
realized how blatantly GOOD had violated the law, because two days later, on August 2, 2012,

4
COMPLAINT
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
B
o
n
a
g
o
f
s
k
y

&

W
e
i
s
s

A
t
t
o
r
n
e
y
s

a
t

L
a
w

Ms. Shotwell sent yet another email. This email from Ms. Shotwell contained a fabricated story
about MOISE and Shotwell having communicated to Plaintiff that they had concerns with her
performance, a highly technical discussion of Plaintiff’s purported rights and responsibilities,
and a false statement that Plaintiff had not been terminated, but that a voluntary separation was
merely one of three options on the table. A true and correct copy of this email is attached hereto
as Exhibit B.
12. GOOD fired Plaintiff because she was diagnosed with cancer, took time off work
for surgery and chemotherapy, and because she objected to the unlawful manner in which
GOOD refused to allow her to return to work (as her physicians recommended she do), because
she put her concerns in writing. GOOD has no plausible explanation for why it would have fired
an executive who, just prior to being diagnosed with cancer, had a stellar year and had been
rewarded with a maximum bonus.
PARTIES
13. Plaintiff is an adult individual residing in Santa Fe, New Mexico.
14. Defendant GOOD is, and was at all times relevant herein, a Delaware
corporation, with its principal place of business in Sunnyvale, California, in the County of Santa
Clara. At all times relevant to this action, GOOD employed more than five employees in
California and had more than 50 employees within 75 miles of Plaintiff’s worksite.
15. Plaintiff is informed and believes and thereupon alleges that Defendant JIM
MOISE is, and was at all times relevant herein was, an adult individual who resides in southern
California. At the time of Plaintiff’s termination, MOISE was GOOD’s Chief Customer Officer
and Executive Vice President Sales, Marketing, and Services, and was Plaintiff’s direct
supervisor.
16. Plaintiff is ignorant of the true names and/or capacities of the defendants sued
herein as Does 1 through 100, inclusive, and therefore sues these defendants by such fictitious
names pursuant to Code of Civil Procedure Section 474. Plaintiff will amend this Complaint to
allege their true names and capacities when ascertained. Each fictitiously-named defendant is
responsible in some manner for the occurrences alleged herein, and Plaintiff is entitled to the

5
COMPLAINT
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
B
o
n
a
g
o
f
s
k
y

&

W
e
i
s
s

A
t
t
o
r
n
e
y
s

a
t

L
a
w

relief requested herein against each such fictitiously-named defendant.
17. Plaintiff is informed and believes and thereupon alleges that, at all times material
herein, each of the specifically named and DOE defendants was the agent of, employee of,
and/or working in concert with, his or her co-defendants and was acting within the course and
scope of such agency, employment and/or concerted activity. To the extent that certain acts and
omissions were perpetrated by certain defendants, the remaining defendant or defendants
authorized, confirmed and/or ratified said acts and omissions.
18. Whenever and wherever reference is made in this complaint to any act by, or
failure to act of, a defendant or defendants, such allegations and reference shall also be deemed
to mean the acts and failures to act of each defendant acting individually, jointly, and severally.
19. Whenever and wherever reference is made to individuals who are not named as
plaintiff or defendants in this complaint but were employees and/or agents of Defendant GOOD,
such individuals at all relevant times acted on behalf of Defendant GOOD within the course and
scope of their employment and/or agency.
GENERAL ALLEGATIONS
20. On August 5, 2010, Plaintiff began working for GOOD as interim Senior Vice
President of Marketing, on a consultant basis. Plaintiff’s role was to assess GOOD’s marketing
department and determine whether she would be interested in assuming the permanent role of
Senior Vice President of Marketing at GOOD. She had been aggressively pursued to accept the
position by CEO King Lee, whom she had known for years and who was familiar with her
earlier work in heading up the creation of Compaq Computer Corp.’s successful Presario brand
of personal computers.
21. On October 5, 2010, Plaintiff accepted GOOD’s offer of permanent employment
as Senior Vice President of Marketing. She initially reported to CEO Lee, who had worked with
her before in several different capacities and knew her skill set well. In December 2011 GOOD
hired Defendant JIM MOISE as Chief Customer Officer and Executive Vice President Sales,
Marketing, and Services. MOISE became Plaintiff’s supervisor at this time; MOISE himself
reported directly to CEO Lee.

6
COMPLAINT
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
B
o
n
a
g
o
f
s
k
y

&

W
e
i
s
s

A
t
t
o
r
n
e
y
s

a
t

L
a
w

22. Plaintiff worked hard and performed her job at GOOD very well.
23. Through the end of 2011, Plaintiff had overseen explosive growth in GOOD’s
marketing department from 12 to nearly 50 employees, had achieved 100% of her Measurable
Business Objectives (MBOs), had led the company in its strategic shift toward a focus on
enterprise customers, spearheaded a project to align the marketing and sales departments, which
were badly misaligned because of a lack of top-end leadership by CEO King Lee, and had
received multiple emails from her peers attesting to her “brilliance” and the “wonderful job” she
and her “amazing” team were doing.
24. At the end of 2011, following her first full year at GOOD, she was rewarded with
a bonus of 50% of her base salary, which was the maximum bonus available to her under her
employment agreement.
25. On March 2, 2012, Plaintiff’s physician diagnosed Plaintiff with stage 3 breast
cancer. Despite having her world turned upside down, Plaintiff’s first instinct was not to leave
her work colleagues or the company in a lurch. She worked tirelessly during the weeks leading
up to her double mastectomy to prepare a departmental coverage plan, which received approval
from GOOD’s management and was to stay in place until she returned from surgery and initial
chemotherapy treatments in approximately May 2012.
26. On March 3, 2012, the day after her diagnosis, but before she had communicated
her diagnosis to GOOD, Plaintiff received an email from David Satterwhite, Vice President and
General Manager, Americas, at GOOD, informing her that her team was “doing an amazing
job.” Attached hereto as Exhibit C is a true and correct copy of this email, redacted to remove
potentially confidential company information.
27. Up to the point when she informed GOOD of her diagnosis, Plaintiff had received
no negative feedback from GOOD regarding her performance.
28. Plaintiff’s medical condition constitutes a disability as defined by the California
Fair Employment and Housing Act. Plaintiff’s disability limits major life activities, such as
working.
29. Plaintiff was able to perform the essential functions of her job with reasonable

7
COMPLAINT
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
B
o
n
a
g
o
f
s
k
y

&

W
e
i
s
s

A
t
t
o
r
n
e
y
s

a
t

L
a
w

accommodation.
30. Plaintiff promptly informed GOOD of her diagnosis and that she would be
scheduling surgery for late March, with chemotherapy and radiation to follow her surgical
recovery.
31. Plaintiff was told by CEO Lee that the company would support her as she came
back to work following her surgery.
32. Plaintiff’s last day at work prior to the surgery was March 23, 2012. GOOD did
not provide Plaintiff with written notice of her rights or obligations under the California Family
Rights Act (“CFRA”) or the Family and Medical Leave Act (“FMLA”) when she went out on
leave at this time, or at any time thereafter prior to her termination. Furthermore, GOOD did not
designate Plaintiff as a “key employee” under the CFRA or FMLA prior to terminating her
employment.
33. Plaintiff underwent surgery on March 27, 2012.
34. During her recovery from the surgery, Plaintiff worked intermittently,
communicating with her supervisor and her team via email, text, and telephone, and by attending
meetings. Plaintiff remained in regular contact with GOOD the entire time she was out
recovering from her surgery.
35. In mid- and late-April 2012, Plaintiff informed GOOD that she would be ready to
return to work in approximately the week of May 14, 2012.
36. Plaintiff began chemotherapy on May 10, 2012.
37. Plaintiff returned to work on May 15, 2012. Plaintiff’s physician advised her that
it would be beneficial to her recovery for her to return to work while undergoing chemotherapy.
38. When she returned to work, Plaintiff scheduled her chemotherapy and other
doctors appointments to minimize the impact it would have on her working schedule.
39. After allowing Plaintiff to take a paid leave for surgery and recovery, GOOD
made no further attempts to engage in an interactive process with Plaintiff to determine whether,
once she returned to work, she would be able to perform the essential functions of her position
with or without a reasonable accommodation.

8
COMPLAINT
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
B
o
n
a
g
o
f
s
k
y

&

W
e
i
s
s

A
t
t
o
r
n
e
y
s

a
t

L
a
w

40. On May 17, 2012, at approximately 3:45 p.m., Plaintiff met with MOISE to catch
up on a number of items that were outstanding. After discussing work related items, MOISE
changed the subject to Plaintiff’s cancer. MOISE told Plaintiff that chemotherapy and radiation
were going to be a long haul and that she should focus on her health instead of working. MOISE
said that Plaintiff’s return to work was “not working,” that it was too confusing to the team, that
people on the team and her peers did not know whom to go to, and the “whole thing” of her
coming and going for medical treatments was “bad for business” and “disruptive to the team.”
MOISE made these statements multiple times during the meeting, which was extremely
upsetting to Plaintiff. MOISE told Plaintiff that the company would pay her while she was out,
but instructed Plaintiff that she was not to come to work and not to work from home. Plaintiff
stated that she was ready and able to work, but it made no difference.
41. On May 22, 2012, Plaintiff sent an email to MOISE and Debbie Shotwell
confirming what MOISE had said on May 17, 2012. In this email, Plaintiff objected to MOISE’s
statements about her being bad for business. On May 25, 2012, MOISE confirmed the accuracy
of the contents of Plaintiff’s May 22, 2012 email. True and correct copies of these emails are
attached hereto as Exhibit D. In another email on May 22, 2012, Plaintiff objected to Debbie
Shotwell about MOISE’s conduct at the May 17, 2012 meeting. A true and correct copy of this
email is attached hereto as Exhibit E.
42. On May 23, 2012, Plaintiff went to a chemotherapy appointment. While she was
in the middle of the appointment, King Lee called her and berated her on the telephone, stating
that they need to talk. Plaintiff informed Lee that she was in the middle of her medical
appointment and that she would have to get back to him the following week after she recovered
from her chemotherapy.
43. On May 24, 2012, Plaintiff informed Ms. Shotwell about the angry telephone call
from Lee and the circumstances surrounding the call. Ms. Shotwell seemed nervous and
concerned about how Lee had acted and told Plaintiff not to talk to Lee because it had been
settled already.
44. On June 6, 2012, Lee called Plaintiff from his car and stated that he had been

9
COMPLAINT
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
B
o
n
a
g
o
f
s
k
y

&

W
e
i
s
s

A
t
t
o
r
n
e
y
s

a
t

L
a
w

reluctant to call her after the last call because she had “been kind of groggy.” Plaintiff informed
him that she had been in the middle of the chemotherapy appointment but that she remembered
that phone call just fine. Lee made small talk about his vacation plans and asked about
Plaintiff’s medical treatment, but said nothing about any dissatisfaction with her job performance
or anything else.
45. On June 18, 2012, Plaintiff met with one of GOOD’s directors, Bandel Carano,
regarding a brand campaign. Mr. Carano appeared to like Plaintiff’s presentation and was
pleased by the meeting. Again, nothing negative was stated about Plaintiff’s job performance
before, during, or after this meeting.
46. On June 28, 2012, Plaintiff met with a candidate as requested for the interim job
of filling in for Plaintiff.
47. On or about July 11, 2012, GOOD sent Plaintiff an email containing a revised
Employee Handbook containing a purported arbitration clause. Plaintiff did not agree to this
purported arbitration clause, and therefore, never entered into any kind of arbitration agreement
with GOOD.
48. On July 18, 2012, the week after GOOD attempted to impose a mandatory
arbitration agreement on Plaintiff, Plaintiff’s assistant emailed her and said that Debbie Shotwell
wanted to meet with Plaintiff. Plaintiff asked whether it was a “meeting” or a “visit” and what it
was regarding. Plaintiff’s assistant did not know. The meeting was eventually scheduled for
lunch time on July 26, 2012.
49. On the morning of July 26, 2012, Plaintiff received a call from her assistant, who
informed Plaintiff that King Lee would also be joining Plaintiff and Ms. Shotwell for the lunch.
50. Plaintiff arrived for the lunch meeting at 12:30 p.m. Lee was not present yet.
Plaintiff asked Ms. Shotwell whether Lee was going to be present. Plaintiff and Ms. Shotwell
made small talk about the company while they waited for Lee.
51. Lee arrived as Plaintiff and Ms. Shotwell finished their food. Lee asked Ms.
Shotwell to leave him alone with Plaintiff.
52. When they were alone, Lee made small talk about the company and then

10
COMPLAINT
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
B
o
n
a
g
o
f
s
k
y

&

W
e
i
s
s

A
t
t
o
r
n
e
y
s

a
t

L
a
w

eventually got to the point of the meeting. Lee told Plaintiff, “Well, look – it’s time for you to
go; you need to leave the company.” Plaintiff was shocked and stunned. Lee continued that it
was time to move on, that MOISE had made the decision and Lee agreed. Lee stated that the
company was going to offer her a year of severance pay and continue her COBRA coverage.
Plaintiff asked whether she was going to see the severance offer in writing and Lee said, “Yes.”
Plaintiff then told him that she needed to think about the offer, at which point Lee jumped up,
grabbed the check and left.
53. Shotwell returned and apparently knew that Plaintiff had been fired, but asked her
nervously about what Lee had said. Plaintiff relayed the conversation to her as they walked back
to Plaintiff’s condominium from the restaurant. Shotwell agreed with Plaintiff that what the
company was doing was awful, and stated that it was horrible and really terrible timing. Ms.
Shotwell began to cry and gave Plaintiff a hug as they parted.
54. In the evening of July 26, 2012, Ms. Shotwell sent Plaintiff an email containing
the summary of the company’s severance package offer to Plaintiff. Nowhere in this email does
it state anything about Plaintiff remaining with the company in any other capacity. What Ms.
Shotwell’s email does say is that GOOD hoped that they could have Plaintiff’s response soon to
achieve “closure” within 1-2 weeks. (See Exhibit A hereto.) Plaintiff responded to this email
the next morning, stating that she had experienced a “horrible night and the stress, especially at
this point, is nearly overwhelming.” Ms. Shotwell then responded “I understand. Let me know
if you need anything.” Ms. Shotwell said nothing about any “alternatives” to Plaintiff having
been fired the day before. A true and correct copy of this email is attached hereto as Exhibit F.
55. On July 31, 2012, Ms. Shotwell emailed Plaintiff asking her to get in contact with
her regarding how she would like to proceed regarding her communication from the prior week.
Plaintiff responded to Ms. Shotwell and informed her that she needed time to think about the
severance offer and consider her options. Plaintiff requested her personnel file and other
documents that she had signed, including the stock option agreement governing her stock
options. Plaintiff also said that the company’s decision to terminate her employment while she
is in the middle of her cancer treatment has been very unsettling to her, and that she would need

11
COMPLAINT
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
B
o
n
a
g
o
f
s
k
y

&

W
e
i
s
s

A
t
t
o
r
n
e
y
s

a
t

L
a
w

a little more time to think about GOOD’s severance offer, and to consider her options before
giving a response. Ms. Shotwell’s email response of less than two hours later does not dispute
Plaintiff’s statement immediately below that she had been terminated in the middle of her cancer
treatment. A true and correct copy of this email is attached hereto as Exhibit G.
56. On August 2, 2012, Ms. Shotwell responded with a new letter, this time
pretending that Plaintiff had not been fired, and falsely claiming that MOISE and Shotwell had
“concerns about your role prior to your diagnosis.” In this letter, Ms. Shotwell also claimed that
Plaintiff now had three options: voluntary separation, FMLA leave, or a reduced role. (See
Exhibit B hereto.) Plaintiff rejected GOOD’s attempt to “rehire” her so that it could have a “do
over” on the FMLA issues, classify her as a “key employee,” and refuse to reinstate her.
57. On October 26, 2012, Plaintiff filed a Complaint of Discrimination with the
Department of Fair Employment and Housing, naming GOOD and MOISE as respondents. On
October 26, 2012, Plaintiff received a copy of her Right-To-Sue Notice from the Department of
Fair Employment and Housing. Plaintiff has thereby exhausted her administrative remedies
against Defendant GOOD prior to filing the instant suit. True and correct copies of the Charges
of Discrimination and Right-to-Sue Notices are attached hereto as Exhibit H and incorporated
by reference herein.

FIRST CAUSE OF ACTION
(Failure to Engage in Interactive Process – Cal. Gov. Code §§ 12940(n))
[Plaintiff Against Defendants GOOD and Does 1-100]
58. Plaintiff restates and incorporates by reference each and every allegation
contained in paragraphs 1 through 57, inclusive, as though fully set forth herein.
59. In violation of California Government Code sections 12926(n), 12926.1(e), and
12940(n), GOOD failed and refused to engage in a timely, good-faith interactive process with
Plaintiff once it learned of Plaintiff’s breast cancer and need for surgery, chemotherapy, and
radiation treatments on or about March 5, 2012, and failed and refused to engage in a timely,
good-faith interactive process with Plaintiff when she returned to work at GOOD on May 15,
2012.
60. As a direct and proximate result of Defendants’ unlawful conduct, Plaintiff has

12
COMPLAINT
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
B
o
n
a
g
o
f
s
k
y

&

W
e
i
s
s

A
t
t
o
r
n
e
y
s

a
t

L
a
w

suffered and will continue to suffer extreme and severe mental anguish and emotional distress
and other non-economic damages including but not limited to shock, anxiety, loss of self-esteem,
and loss of self-worth, and has incurred and will continue to incur medical expenses for
treatment by health care professionals, and for other incidental medical expenses. Plaintiff has
also suffered wage loss and loss of benefits, past and future. Plaintiff is thereby entitled to
general and compensatory damages in amounts to be proven at trial and in excess of the
jurisdictional minimum of this Court. Plaintiff is also entitled to attorneys’ fees and costs
pursuant to statute.
61. The conduct of GOOD’s officers, directors, and managing agents in terminating
Plaintiff’s employment was done intentionally, and with full knowledge of and in conscious
disregard for the harm it would cause to Plaintiff. Plaintiff seeks an award of exemplary
damages against GOOD in an amount sufficient to make an example of and to punish GOOD.

SECOND CAUSE OF ACTION
(Failure to Accommodate Disability – Cal. Gov. Code §12940(m))
[Plaintiff Against Defendants GOOD and Does 1-100]
62. Plaintiff restates and incorporates by reference each and every allegation
contained in paragraphs 1 through 61, inclusive, as though fully set forth herein.
63. In violation of California Government Code sections 12926(n), 12926.1(e), and
12940(m), GOOD failed to take reasonable steps to accommodate Plaintiff’s disability.
64. As a direct and proximate result of Defendants’ unlawful conduct, Plaintiff has
suffered and will continue to suffer extreme and severe mental anguish and emotional distress
and other non-economic damages including but not limited to shock, anxiety, loss of self-esteem,
and loss of self-worth, and has incurred and will continue to incur medical expenses for
treatment by health care professionals, and for other incidental medical expenses. Plaintiff has
also suffered wage loss and loss of benefits, past and future. Plaintiff is thereby entitled to
general and compensatory damages in amounts to be proven at trial and in excess of the
jurisdictional minimum of this Court. Plaintiff is also entitled to attorney’s fees and costs
pursuant to statute.
65. The conduct of GOOD’s officers, directors, and managing agents in terminating

13
COMPLAINT
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
B
o
n
a
g
o
f
s
k
y

&

W
e
i
s
s

A
t
t
o
r
n
e
y
s

a
t

L
a
w

Plaintiff’s employment was done intentionally, and with full knowledge of and in conscious
disregard for the harm it would cause to Plaintiff. Plaintiff seeks an award of exemplary
damages against GOOD in an amount sufficient to make an example of and to punish GOOD.

THIRD CAUSE OF ACTION
(Disability Discrimination – Cal. Gov. Code §12940(a))
[Plaintiff against Defendants GOOD and Does 1-100]
66. Plaintiff restates and incorporates by reference each and every allegation
contained in paragraphs 1 through 65, inclusive, as though fully set forth herein.
67. Plaintiff was employed by GOOD, which is an “employer” under the California
Fair Employment and Housing Act, Cal. Gov. Code section 12926, et seq.
68. Before terminating her employment, GOOD knew that Plaintiff had a disability
that limited her ability to work.
69. Plaintiff was able to perform the essential job duties of her position with
reasonable accommodation of her disability.
70. As alleged above, Defendant GOOD unlawfully discriminated against Plaintiff
based on her disability and/or perceived disability. Defendant GOOD did so by, among other
things, refusing her to return to work following her surgery and by terminating Plaintiff’s
employment. Plaintiff’s disability was a motivating reason for GOOD’s termination of
Plaintiff’s employment.
71. As a direct and proximate result of Defendants’ unlawful conduct, Plaintiff has
suffered and will continue to suffer extreme and severe mental anguish and emotional distress
and other non-economic damages including but not limited to shock, anxiety, loss of self-esteem,
and loss of self-worth, and has incurred and will continue to incur medical expenses for
treatment by health care professionals, and for other incidental medical expenses. Plaintiff has
also suffered wage loss and loss of benefits, past and future. Plaintiff is thereby entitled to
general and compensatory damages in amounts to be proven at trial and in excess of the
jurisdictional minimum of this Court, and to attorney’s fees and costs pursuant to statute.
72. The conduct of GOOD’s officers, directors, and managing agents in terminating
Plaintiff’s employment was done intentionally, and with full knowledge of and in conscious

14
COMPLAINT
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
B
o
n
a
g
o
f
s
k
y

&

W
e
i
s
s

A
t
t
o
r
n
e
y
s

a
t

L
a
w

disregard for the harm it would cause to Plaintiff. Plaintiff seeks an award of exemplary
damages against GOOD in an amount sufficient to make an example of and to punish GOOD.

FOURTH CAUSE OF ACTION
(Disability Harassment – Cal. Gov. Code §12940(g))
[Plaintiff against Defendants GOOD, MOISE, and Does 1-100]
73. Plaintiff restates and incorporates by reference each and every allegation
contained in paragraphs 1 through 72, inclusive, as though fully set forth herein.
74. Plaintiff was employed by GOOD, which is an “employer” under the California
Fair Employment and Housing Act, Cal. Gov. Code section 12926, et seq.
75. Before terminating her employment, GOOD knew that Plaintiff had a disability
that limited one or more major life activities.
76. Plaintiff was subjected to unwanted harassing conduct because of her disability.
Defendant MOISE engaged in the aforementioned harassing conduct by telling Plaintiff to go
home and not come back to the office until her chemotherapy and radiation treatments were
finished because her need for these treatments and her comings and goings for treatment were
supposedly “disruptive,” “confusing for the team,” and “bad for business.” MOISE made these
statements several times during his May 17, 2012 meeting, and caused Plaintiff severe emotional
distress in so doing.
77. The harassing conduct was severe or pervasive.
78. A reasonable person in Plaintiff’s circumstances would have considered the work
environment to be hostile or abusive.
79. Plaintiff subjectively considered the work environment hostile or abusive.
80. As a direct and proximate result of Defendants’ unlawful conduct, Plaintiff has
suffered and will continue to suffer extreme and severe mental anguish and emotional distress
and other non-economic damages including but not limited to shock, anxiety, loss of self-esteem,
and loss of self-worth, and has incurred and will continue to incur medical expenses for
treatment by health care professionals, and for other incidental medical expenses. Plaintiff has
also suffered wage loss and loss of benefits, past and future. Plaintiff is thereby entitled to
general and compensatory damages in amounts to be proven at trial and in excess of the

15
COMPLAINT
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
B
o
n
a
g
o
f
s
k
y

&

W
e
i
s
s

A
t
t
o
r
n
e
y
s

a
t

L
a
w

jurisdictional minimum of this Court, and to attorneys’ fees and costs pursuant to statute.
81. The conduct of GOOD’s officers, directors, and managing agents in terminating
Plaintiff’s employment was done intentionally, and with full knowledge of and in conscious
disregard for the harm it would cause to Plaintiff. Plaintiff seeks an award of exemplary
damages against GOOD in an amount sufficient to make an example of and to punish GOOD.

FIFTH CAUSE OF ACTION
(Retaliation – Cal. Gov. Code §§12940(h), 12945.2(t))
[Plaintiff Against Defendant GOOD and Does 1-100]
82. Plaintiff restates and incorporates by reference each and every allegation
contained in paragraphs 1 through 81, inclusive, as though fully set forth herein.
83. Plaintiff was eligible for medical leave pursuant to the California Family Rights
Act, California Government Code section 12945.1, et seq. (“CFRA”).
84. From March 26, 2012, through May 14, 2012, Plaintiff took a medical leave that
was CFRA-eligible for her own serious health condition that made her unable to perform the
functions of her position with GOOD for the time she was on medical leave. This medical leave
also constituted a reasonable accommodation of Plaintiff’s disability.
85. Plaintiff further objected verbally and in writing when MOISE accused her of
being disruptive and bad for business at the May 17, 2012 meeting, and in so doing, engaged in
protected conduct under the FEHA and CFRA.
86. GOOD unlawfully used Plaintiff’s medical leave and her opposition to MOISE’s
harassing comments as negative factors in evaluating her job performance and in selecting her
for termination.
87. The conduct of Defendants, and each of them, was a substantial factor in causing
the harm suffered by Plaintiff.
88. As a direct and proximate result of Defendants’ unlawful conduct, Plaintiff has
suffered and will continue to suffer extreme and severe mental anguish and emotional distress.
Plaintiff has incurred and will continue to incur medical expenses for treatment by health care
professionals, and for other incidental medical expenses. Plaintiff has also suffered wage loss
and other harm. Plaintiff is thereby entitled to compensatory damages in an amount to be proven

16
COMPLAINT
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
B
o
n
a
g
o
f
s
k
y

&

W
e
i
s
s

A
t
t
o
r
n
e
y
s

a
t

L
a
w

at trial and in excess of the jurisdictional minimum of the Court, and to attorneys’ fees and costs,
including expert witness fees, pursuant to statute. GOOD’s managing agents engaged in the
aforementioned discrimination and retaliation intentionally, oppressively, and in conscious
disregard of Plaintiff’s rights, and/or by authorizing and ratifying the discriminatory conduct of
others that was directed at Plaintiff. Plaintiff is, therefore, also entitled to exemplary damages in
an amount sufficient to make an example of and punish each Defendant. Plaintiff is further
entitled to injunctive relief, requiring the Defendants, and each of them, to remedy their
discriminatory practices.

SIXTH CAUSE OF ACTION
(Failure to Prevent, Investigate, and Remedy Discrimination, Harassment, and Retaliation)
[Plaintiff Against Defendants GOOD and Does 1-100]
89. Plaintiff restates and incorporates by reference each and every allegation
contained in paragraphs 1 through 88, inclusive, as though fully set forth herein.
90. In violation of California Government Code section 12940(k), GOOD failed to
take reasonable steps to prevent or remedy discrimination against Plaintiff based on her
disability. GOOD failed to investigate reports of harassment, discrimination, and denial of
reasonable accommodations despite having knowledge of the same.
91. As a direct and proximate result of Defendants’ unlawful conduct, Plaintiff has
suffered and will continue to suffer extreme and severe mental anguish and emotional distress
and other non-economic damages including but not limited to shock, anxiety, loss of self-esteem,
and loss of self-worth, and has incurred and will continue to incur medical expenses for
treatment by health care professionals, and for other incidental medical expenses. Plaintiff has
also suffered wage loss and loss of benefits, past and future. Plaintiff is thereby entitled to
general and compensatory damages in amounts to be proven at trial and in excess of the
jurisdictional minimum of this Court. Plaintiff is also entitled to attorneys’ fees and costs
pursuant to statute.
92. The conduct of GOOD’s officers, directors, and managing agents in terminating
Plaintiff’s employment was done intentionally, and with full knowledge of and in conscious
disregard for the harm it would cause to Plaintiff. Plaintiff seeks an award of exemplary

17
COMPLAINT
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
B
o
n
a
g
o
f
s
k
y

&

W
e
i
s
s

A
t
t
o
r
n
e
y
s

a
t

L
a
w

damages against GOOD in an amount sufficient to make an example of and to punish GOOD.
SEVENTH CAUSE OF ACTION
(Interference with Rights Under CFRA – Cal. Gov. Code §12945.2(t))
[Plaintiff against Defendants GOOD and Does 1-100]
93. Plaintiff restates and incorporates by reference each and every allegation
contained in paragraphs 1 through 92, inclusive, as though fully set forth herein.
94. As alleged above, Plaintiff went out on paid leave for her breast cancer surgery
and during her recovery from the surgery. Furthermore, when Plaintiff returned to work
following surgery, she required intermittent leave to attend doctor’s appointments and undergo
chemotherapy.
95. The California Family Rights Act (“CFRA”) requires an employer to grant up to
twelve workweeks of family and medical leave to an employee who suffers from a serious
medical condition. One such qualifying medical condition is cancer. The CFRA requires that
the employer reinstate the employee to the same or comparable job upon completion of such
leave, and to grant intermittent leave as needed for medical appointments.
96. At the time she began her leave, Plaintiff had more than 12 months of service
with GOOD and had worked more than 1,250 hours in those preceding 12 months.
97. When Plaintiff’s physician informed her that she could return to work, Plaintiff
communicated to GOOD that she was ready, willing, and able to return to work. GOOD initially
allowed her to return to work, but after only three days, sent Plaintiff home until she was
finished with her treatment, claiming that her comings and goings for medical appointments was
disruptive, confusing, and bad for business. In so doing, GOOD denied Plaintiff the right to take
CFRA-eligible leave for her medical appointments, and to return to work following a CFRA-
eligible leave.
98. Under the circumstances, per section 7297.4 of Title 2 of the California Code of
Regulations, GOOD was on notice of Plaintiff’s entitlement to and need for CFRA-qualifying
leave, and had a duty to provide Plaintiff with notice that her continued leave was CFRA-
qualifying leave and to guarantee that Plaintiff would be able to return to work at the conclusion
of the CFRA leave period.

18
COMPLAINT
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
B
o
n
a
g
o
f
s
k
y

&

W
e
i
s
s

A
t
t
o
r
n
e
y
s

a
t

L
a
w

99. GOOD failed to satisfy its duties under the CFRA and its applicable regulations
to provide Plaintiff with the required notices under the CFRA regarding designation of a leave as
CFRA-qualifying, to provide a guarantee of reinstatement, to permit Plaintiff to return to work
following her CFRA-eligible leave, and to permit her to take intermittent leave for medical
appointments following her return to work.
100. As a direct and proximate result of GOOD’s unlawful conduct, Plaintiff has
suffered and will continue to suffer extreme and severe mental anguish and emotional distress;
Plaintiff has incurred and will continue to incur medical expenses for treatment by health care
professionals, and for other incidental medical expenses; and Plaintiff has suffered wage loss and
other harm. Plaintiff is thereby entitled to general and compensatory damages in amounts to be
proven at trial and in excess of the jurisdictional minimum of this Court, and to attorneys’ fees
and costs pursuant to statute. Because Defendant GOOD’s managing agents acted intentionally,
oppressively, and in conscious disregard of Plaintiff’s rights, Plaintiff is also entitled to punitive
damages in an amount sufficient to make an example of and punish GOOD. Plaintiff is further
entitled to injunctive relief requiring GOOD to remedy its discriminatory practices by reinstating
Plaintiff’s employment and by enjoining GOOD from engaging in similar unlawful conduct in
the future.

EIGHTH CAUSE OF ACTION
(Wrongful Termination in Violation of Public Policy)
[Plaintiff against Defendant GOOD and Does 1-100]
101. Plaintiff restates and incorporates by reference each and every allegation
contained in paragraphs 1 through 100, inclusive, as though fully set forth herein.
102. At all times relevant hereto, until July 26, 2012, Plaintiff was an employee of
GOOD. On July 26, 2012, GOOD terminated Plaintiff’s employment as alleged above.
GOOD’s termination of Plaintiff’s employment was motivated by Plaintiff’s disability and need
for CFRA-qualifying leave, and was therefore in violation of fundamental and substantial public
policies of the State of California and the United States of America, including but not limited to
the Fair Employment and Housing Act, California Government Code section 12900, et seq.; the
CFRA, California Government Code section 12945.2; the Americans with Disabilities Act of

19
COMPLAINT
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
B
o
n
a
g
o
f
s
k
y

&

W
e
i
s
s

A
t
t
o
r
n
e
y
s

a
t

L
a
w

1990, 42 U.S.C. §12101, et seq., and the Family and Medical Leave Act of 1993, 29 U.S.C.
§2601, et seq., and related state and federal regulations.
103. As a direct and proximate result of Defendants’ unlawful conduct, Plaintiff has
suffered and will continue to suffer extreme and severe mental anguish and emotional distress
and other non-economic damages including but not limited to shock, anxiety, loss of self-esteem,
and loss of self-worth, and has incurred and will continue to incur medical expenses for
treatment by health care professionals, and for other incidental medical expenses. Plaintiff has
also suffered wage loss and loss of benefits, past and future. Plaintiff is thereby entitled to
general and compensatory damages in amounts to be proven at trial and in excess of the
jurisdictional minimum of this Court.
104. The conduct of GOOD’s officers, directors, and managing agents in terminating
Plaintiff’s employment was done intentionally, and with full knowledge of and in conscious
disregard for the harm it would cause to Plaintiff. Plaintiff seeks an award of exemplary
damages against GOOD in an amount sufficient to make an example of and to punish GOOD.

NINTH CAUSE OF ACTION
(Constructive Discharge in Violation of Public Policy)
[Plaintiff against Defendant GOOD and Does 1-100]
105. Plaintiff restates and incorporates by reference each and every allegation
contained in paragraphs 1 through 104, inclusive, as though fully set forth herein.
106. At all times relevant hereto, until July 26, 2012, Plaintiff was an employee of
GOOD. On July 26, 2012, GOOD constructively discharged Plaintiff. GOOD’s constructive
discharge of Plaintiff was motivated by Plaintiff’s disability and need for CFRA-qualifying
leave, and was therefore in violation of fundamental and substantial public policies of the State
of California and the United States of America, including but not limited to the Fair Employment
and Housing Act, California Government Code section 12900, et seq.; the CFRA, California
Government Code section 12945.2; the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990, 42 U.S.C.
§12101, et seq., and the Family and Medical Leave Act of 1993, 29 U.S.C. §2601, et seq., and
related state and federal regulations.
107. As a direct and proximate result of Defendants’ unlawful conduct, Plaintiff has
(/)
!!!3:
3
j
KSt

11)>-
IL
w


00:{
[)
suffered and will continue to suffer extreme and severe mental anguish and emotional distress
2 and other non-economic damages including but not limited to shock, anxiety, loss of self-esteem,
3 and loss of self-worth, and has incurred and will continue to incur medical expenses for
4 treatment by health care professionals, and for other incidental medical expenses. Plaintiff has
5 also suffered wage loss and loss of benefits, past and future. Plaintiff is thereby entitled to
6 general and compensatory damages in amounts to be proven at trial and in excess of the
7 jurisdictional minimum of this Court.
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
108. The conduct of GOOD's officers, directors, and managing agents in terminating
Plaintiffs employment was done intentionally, and with full knowledge of and in conscious
disregard for the harm it would cause to Plaintiff. Plaintiff seeks an award of exemplary
damages against GOOD in an amount sufficient to make an example of and to punish GOOD.
PRAYER FOR RELIEF
WHEREFORE, Plaintiff requests the following judgment and relief from Defendants:
1. Compensatory damages, including general damages, special damages, economic
damages, and non-economic damages in an amount according to proof at trial;
2. Exemplary damages in an amount according to proof, to punish and make an example of
defendants;
3. Statutory attorneys' fees and costs, including costs of expert witnesses;
4. Prejudgment and post-judgment interest according to any applicable provision oflaw,
according to proof;
5. Costs of suit; and
6. Such other and further relief as the court deems just and proper.
Dated: October 29,2012 BONAGOFSKY & WEISS

By: __ ______________ __
Scott Bonagofsky
Attorneys for Plaintiff
SUSAN VINCI-LUCERO
20
COMPLAINT
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
U)
13 !!l:s;

161;;( 14
>-Cf)

cnw
15 il.z
0[(
"0
H:
16

[}
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
JURY DEMAND
Plaintiff SUSAN VINCI-LUCERO demands trial by jury for all issues so triable in this
action.
Dated: October 29,2012 BONAGOFSKY & WEISS

Scott Bonagofsky
Attorneys for Plaintiff
SUSAN VINCI-LUCERO
21
COMPLAINT
EXHIBIT A
Thursday, July 26, 201210:30:06 PM Pacific Daylight Time
Subject: Susan Vinci Lucero -- Attorney-Client Privileged & Confidential
Date: Thursday, July 26,20129:57:22 PM Pacific Daylight Time
From: Debbie Shotwell
To: Susan Vinci-Lucero
Dear Susan,
Thank you for taking the time to meet with us today. We want to be highly respectful of your
circumstances and address a very challenging situation in a way that both honors our relationship with you
and serves the needs of the company in the short term and long term.
As discussed, as an executive severance package upon termination, Good is currently prepared to offer you
the following:
1. 12 months base pay
2. 12 months additional stock option vesting
3. 12 months post-separation to exercise your vested stock options
4. .• COBRA covemge for the legal maximum of 29 months
5. Gdod will continue to pay for your condo until your medical treatment is complete
If this is acceptable to you. we'll fonnalizeitinto a separation agreement that spells out the terms and
of claims. of the sensitivity and personal nature of this situation, at this
time we are not diSclosing anything to employees genemlly within the marketing department or elsewhere
intbe i;x)mpany .. We wotild greatly prefer to reach an agreement that you are comfortable with you in the
next 1-2 weeks so that there is closure. I am happy to answer any questions you have, and work with you as
andwhenconvement. When you are ready, I will personally take care of all the necessary paperwork and
reducing any burden on you.
Respectfully,
Debbie Shotwell
Attachment: Stock Option Worksheet
This email and any attachments thereto may contain private, confidential, and privileged material for
the sole use of the intended recipient. Any review. copying, or distribution of this email (or any
attachments thereto) by others is strictly prohibited. If you are not the intended recipient, please
contact the sender immediately and pennanently delete the original and any copies of this email and
any attachments thereto.
Pagel of
EXHIBITB
From: Debbie Shotwell
Sent: Thursday, August 02,2012 12:41 PM
To: Susan Vinci-Lucero
Subject: Request for documents response
Importance: High
PERSONALICOMP ANY CONFIDENTIAL OFFER
August 2,2012
Via Electronic Mail and Federal Express
Ms. Susan Vinci-Lucero
1901 Cerros Colorados
Santa Fe, NM 87501
Re: Leave of Absence
Dear Susan:
We received your e-mail of yesterday evening, and we are gathering all of the
personnel and insurance information you've requested. To be clear, you have not
been terminated from the Company. Our conversations were intended to
communicate the decision to move in anotherdirection for leadership of the
company's marketing department made prior to your diagnosis as well as the
challenges ofthe current situation and your rights and responsibilities related to
continued employment. However, given our desire to continue to be as generous as
possible with you and, we wanted to offer you the opportunity of structuring a
voluntary executive separation package. Indeed, no changes have been made to pay
or benefits and your access to the Company's computer systems, your electronic mail,
etc. and no change of status has been communicated to the organization.
So that you may fully consider the alternatives, it is important that we deliver
the information and documentation to you that we initially discussed so that there is
no misunderstanding regarding your options and the Company's intentions.
To be clear, we are very grateful for your service. We also know that you
continue to face some personal medical challenges, and we do want to make sure that
you receive all of the benefits that you are entitled to and more, if we can. However,
we also need to be clear about your rights and responsibilities as well as the
Company's rights and responsibilities. We hope this clarity will help you focus on
your recovery and your eventual return to work.
I. Circumstances To Date
In order to clarify the current alternatives, it is helpful to review how we got
here. When you notified us that you had been diagnosed with breast cancer and
would need to take some time offfor surgical treatment as well as post-operative
treatments, we immediately granted your request. Although you were aware that you
were entitled to take an unpaid FMLA/CFRA leave of absence, you voluntarily
requested and elected to take a paid medical leave of absence for the surgical
treatment and continue to work on an as-needed basis while receiving post-operative
treatments. Based on your request, the Company allowed you to set your own
schedule and has continued to pay you your full salary of$9,375.00 (semi-monthly)
during your absence(s) through the date of this letter. In addition, you recommended
a plan to provide coverage of the essential duties of the marketing department. This
included the services of Christine Crandell along with Kirsten Berg-Painter,
consultants hired by the company for these services.
As you are aware, for a considerable period during 201 O-into early 2012, the
Company faced significant challenges relating to the interaction ofthe Sales and
Marketing groups. Accordingly, prior to your recent illness, the Company appointed
Jim Moise to the position of Chief Revenue Officer. You were asked to begin
reporting to Jim Moise rather than King Lee, the Company's Chief Executive Officer,
and you have done so since Jimjoined the Company. During the first 2.5 months of
Jim's tenure with the company, Jim had the opportunity to assess the interaction
between the sales and marketing groups, as well as the effectiveness of your
leadership ofthe marketing team. As you are aware, both Jim and I had concerns
about your role prior to your diagnosis.
In any event, as Jim discussed with you, and as King and I reiterated, while
the Company remains committed to working with you in an interactive process, the
functions of your position are critical to the Company, and it is essential that the
Company have consistent coverage of those functions. We first had to retain a part-
time short term project-based consultant (and more recently a full-time short term
project-based consultant) to cover your responsibilities and have been holding your
position open. However, the continued concerns of management as well as the
current situation where duties are split between you and temporary personnel has
become untenable and is causing significant financial impact to the Company and the
viability of its products. While we understand that you have been ill, unfortunately
you have not been able to cover the essential functions of your position. Likewise,
although we understand that your treatments interfere with your ability to consistently
come to the office; your position requires regular, reliable and predictable
attendance. Accordingly, the Company can no longer continue to accommodate an
intermittent leave! "work as able" schedule because it creates an undue hardship on
the Company. Thus, as we informed you, if you were not interested in a voluntary
separation, we would need to request that you remain out on FMLA leave on a full
time basis as set forth below.
II. Alternatives Moving Forward
Prior to discussing a potential voluntary separation with you, we evaluated the
various options available to you and the Company and believed that a voluntary
separation was most advantageous to you. Because you are not able to perform the
essential functions of your duties on a full time basis, the Company has provisionally
approved that you begin a full time FMLA!CFRA leave of absence. Additionally, we
think it is important to clarify and present to you the three alternatives we've
considered for how we could move forward.
The first alternative is a voluntary separation.
The second alternative at this time is for you to begin a full time
FMLA/CFRA leave of absence in your current position as Senior Vice President of
Marketing and Product Management, subject to your understanding of the
information set forth below regarding your Key Employee status.
The third alternative is for you to begin a full time FMLA/CFRA leave of
absence and presently accept an alternative non-executive position. In this new
position, you would not be a "Key Employee" within the meaning of the leave
statutes and, therefore, you would have the usual statutory reinstatement rights that
apply to employees that are not Key Employees described in more detail below and in
the attachments.
A. Alternative 1: Separation Package
As we discussed with you, for various reasons related to management concerns, your
compensation and benefits, and the possibility that upon completion of the 12 week
FMLA/CFRA period, you might not be able meet the essential functions of your
position by meeting the same work schedule demands and other demands and
responsibilities as you did prior to going on leave; to protect your continued health
coverage you may prefer to resign your employment. As also indicated, if you were
interested in pursuing this alternative, upon execution of a Separation and Release
Agreement acceptable to the Company, the Company would be willing to provide
you with the generous and much more extensive compensation and
benefits outlined in our discussion. As you requested during our discussion, those
general terms were set out in my e-mail of July 26 to you. In summary the
conditional offer included 12 months base pay, 12 months additional stock option
vesting (i.e., accelerated vesting), 12 months post-separation to exercise your vested
.stock options, reimbursement for COBRA coverage for the leave maximum (29
months) and as a further goodwill gesture, continued payment of the rent on the
condominium until your current medical treatment is completed. As we indicated, if
you were interested in this option a Separation and Release Agreement would be
provided to you and you would have time to consider the Agreement in accordance
with applicable law.
B. Alternative 2: FMLA & Potential
Reinstatement Post-Leave
As the Senior Vice President of Marketing and Product Management, you are
a Key Employee under our policy and within the meaning of the FMLAICFRA as you
are among the highest paid 10 percent of all the employees employed by the
Company. Although FMLAICFRA generally require that employees be reinstated to
the same or an equivalent job with the same pay, benefits and other terms and
conditions of employment upon return from leave, because you are a Key Employee,
restoration of employment may be denied following FMLAICFRA leave on the
grounds that such restoration will cause substantial and grievous economic injury to
the Company.
Given all of the information set forth above, the Company must reserve all
rights with respect to your status as a Key Employee and its rights to determine that
continuing your leave of absence and restoring you to employment will cause an
undue hardship and substantial and grievous economic injury. We currently
anticipate that it may be necessary to provide such notice to you in the near future,
but we will, of course, provide specific notice ofthat determination once it is made,
and you will be given an opportunity to return to full-time employment if you are able
to do so immediately. However, if you are unable to immediately return to work and
resume the full responsibilities of your current position, the Company would be
within its rights to deny reinstatement. Of course, the Company would be willing to
engage in an interactive process with you regarding reasonable accommodations
including reviewing whether there were any available vacant positions at that
time. Nevertheless, it is important to note that being denied restoration could
significantly and negatively impact your receipt of health benefits, stock options
vesting and severance eligibility.
Unfortunately, if your employment with the Company ends, your Company
health benefits will also end, subject to your right to continue your health insurance
under COBRA.
Further, you should consider the impact of denied reinstatement on your stock
options. As set forth in the attached 2006 Stock Plan: Stock Option Agreement, many
of your stock options have not yet vested. In addition, your vesting schedule(s) may
be adjusted due to your leave of absence as set forth in Section 6{ d) of the
document. Further, if as anticipated, the Company needs to notify you of the intent to
deny your reinstatement, your vesting may be impacted and could terminate.
Finally, you should note that based on the definition in your October 5, 20 I 0
Offer Letter, and depending on your circumstances, you could be ineligible for
severance if it is determined that you are Permanently Disabled within the meaning of
the Agreement and are unable to return to your current position.
For all of the above reasons, our assessment is that the above alternative is not
one that is in your best interest as it creates substantial uncertainty and risk.
C. Alternative 3: Reduced Role.
Among the alternatives that we've examined is whether or not you could
continue your employment in a different capacity and avoid the possibility ofthe
Company being forced to notify you that it will deny reinstatement and, thus,
potentially jeopardize your health benefits. In this scenario, you would notify us in
the next two weeks that you are requesting a reduced role effective upon completion
of your FMLAICFRA leave. The Company could then allow you to accept an
alternative non-executive position in order to accommodate you. In order to maintain
your health benefits, under the terms ofthe Aetna Health Plan, you would be required
to regularly work at least 32 hours per week The specific salary and other terms of the
new position would be set forth in a new, at-will, Employment Agreement
commensurate with the position, which will include a release of claims but will
supersede your current Offer Letter.
III. Leave of Absence Information
As explained above, regardless of which alternative you select, since you are
not currently able to perform the essential functions of your duties on a full time
basis, the Company has provisionally approved an unpaid FMLAICFRA leave of
absence. We will continue your health benefits, and subject to our reservation of
rights set forth above, we will continue to pay the employer portion of those benefits
for the entire 12 week leave period. In order to maximize your health benefits, the 12
week period will be granted as FMLAICFRA leave conditioned upon your furnishing
medical certification that includes an expected date of return. This leave will count
concurrently against both your annual FMLA and any state law leave entitlement. A
copy of the FMLA/CFRA leave of absence information is attached.
Though we do not doubt the serious nature of your condition, in accordance
with Company policy, you are required to furnish a medical certification of your
serious health condition within 15 days of your receipt of this letter. Please have your
health care provider complete the attached medical certification form and ensure that
I receive the completed form within 15 days.
You have the alternative of using any remaining paid time off benefits during
your leave. Please let us know in writing if you wish to do so.
If you believe that you will need to extend your leave of absence beyond the
end of the FMLA/CFRA period, you will also need to advise us as soon as possible so
that we can determine the extent of continued coverage under the Americans with
Disabilities Act ("ADA") and/or applicable state law and engage in an interactive
process with you to determine whether additional leave and/or other accommodations
would allow you to return to work and perform the essential functions of your
position. Please be advised that if you have already been informed that you will not
be able to return to work full time then you would not be entitled to any additional
leave and you would be obligated to advise us ofthat fact as soon as possible.
You will be required to furnish us with periodic reports of your expected
return date every month or upon expiration of the time period originally estimated by
your health care provider, whichever is longer. If the circumstances of your leave
change and you are able to return to work earlier, you will be required to notify us at
least two work days prior to the date you intend to report to work.
Please note that once you are released to return to work, you will be required
to present a Release to Return to work or Fitness for Duty certificate prior to being
restored to employment. If such certification is not received, your return to work may
be delayed until the certification is provided. The certification should also list any
restrictions, if applicable.
IV. Additional Benefits Information
We have directed Sun Life Financial to forward information regarding
applying for benefits under the Company's Short Term Disability ("STD") programs
to you. Notwithstanding that you originally declined to apply for benefits under this
policy, you may want to reconsider this alternative.
Please note that the process for applying for STD is separate and distinct from
your obligations with respect to your employment and leave of absence. Depending
on the terms of the applicable Plan(s), you may be eligible for benefits
notwithstanding whether you are able to continue your employment with the
Company. All benefits determinations, however, are made pursuant to the terms of
the applicable Plan by the Sun Life Financial Plan Administrator. Accordingly, on a
going forward basis, please forward all documents related to STD directly to the Sun
Life Financial Plan Administrator who will be administering your c1aim(s). The
contact person and address will be included in the documentation.
You also may be entitled to file for State Disability Insurance. Accordingly,
enclosed is a copy of the brochure "Disability Insurance Provisions" describing the
process to apply for state disability insurance benefits through the California EDD.
Please note that, as set forth above, your application for disability insurance
benefits with the state and/or the Plan are separate and distinct from your leave and
employment rights. Accordingly, we will need to receive the FMLA Certification
referenced above, with an expected return to work date, notwithstanding what you
have submitted with respect to the state and/or the Plan with respect to disability
benefits.
V. Conclusion
We want to do everything we can for you during this difficult time, and so we
crafted the voluntary separation offer in an effort to work with you to achieve the
maximum benefits that may be available to you, while at the same time avoiding
substantial and grievous economic injury to the Company. If you are interested in the
voluntary separation offer, and would like to accept it as outlined, or the offer ofa
reduced role, please let us know by two weeks from today, and we will prepare either
the required Separation and Release Agreement or a new offer letter, as applicable,
for your consideration. However, as noted above, if you decline both of those
alternatives, you will begin an unpaid FMLAICFRA leave until the 12 leave period
has been exhausted. You will be entitled to use all accrued unused PTO during the
otherwise unpaid FMLAICFRA leave. In addition, the Company would promptly
notify you of any intent to deny reinstatement upon making the appropriate findings
in accordance with the provisions relating to Key Employees.
We are sorry this letter is so formal and complex. However, we are trying to
give you all of the information you need to move forward and to comply with all of
the applicable laws. If you have any questions, please contact me at 212-
7406 as I will personally work with you to address any questions you have regarding
your leave of absence.
Enclosures:
FMLA/CFRAPolicy
FMLA/DOL-CFRA Forms:
Sincerely,
Debbie Shotwell
Vice President Global
Human Resources
WH-38l (Modified for CA) (Notice of Eligibility and Rights and
Responsibilities/FMLA)
CFRA Notice Pamphlet (DFEH-188)
Certification Form
WH-380E (Modified for CA) (Certification of Health Care Provider for
Employee's Serious Health Condition
EDD Disability Insurance Provisions/SOl Pamphlet (DE 2515)
2006 Stock Plan: Stock Option Agreement
Debbie ShotweH ! Vice President Global Human Resources I Good
Technology! dshotvilell@good.com I 0: 408 .. 212-7406 I M 925·963 .. 5192 ! www.good.com
1 430 N. [v1ary Ave, Suite- 200, Sunnyvale. C , ~ 94085
<imageOO Ijpg>
<Good - FMLA_CFRA Policy_(PALlB1_ 4994868_1).PDF>
<Good - CFRA Notice Pamphlet (DFEH-188L(PALlB2_5969998_1).PDF>
<Good - Disability Insurance Provisions_SOl Pamphlet (DE
2515L(PALlB1_ 4994267 _1).PDF>
<Good - 2006 Stock Plan_ Stock Option
Agreement_(PALlB1_ 4994915_1).PDF>
<Good - WH-381 Notice of Eligibility and Rights and Responsibilities
[CAL(PALlB1_ 4994184_1).DOC>
<Good - WH-380-E Cert of Health Care Provider for Employee_s Serious
Health Condition [CAL(PALlB2_5970005_1).DOC>
<Good - WH-382 Designation Notice (FMLA)
[CAL(PALlB2_5969991_1).DOC>
EXHIBIT C
Susan E. Vinci-Lucero
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
David Satterwhite
Saturday, March 03, 2012 12:24 PM
Susan Vinci-Lucero
RE: Quick RSA Recap
Your team is doing an amazing job Susan. Thanks.
David·
David Satterwhite I VP and General Manager, Americas I Good Technology
dsatterwhite@good.com I 408-212-73121 www.good.com
tV).!.
-
Watch our YouTube video: http://www.youtube.com!watch?v=Yx2b3502RTw
Note: The information contained in this message may be privileged and confidential and protected from disclosure. If the reader of
this message is not the intended recipient, or an employee or agent responsible for delivering this message to the intended reCipient,
you are hereby notified that any dissemination, distribution or copying of this communication is strictly prohibited. If you have
received this communication in error, please notify us immediately by replying to the message and deleting it from your computer.
Thank you.
REDACTED
EXHIBITD
RE: Work Discussion Summary
10f6
Subject: RE: Work Discussion Summary
From: "Jim Moise"
Date: 5/25/2012 11:56 AM
To: "Susan Vinci-Lucero"
CC: "Debbie Shotwell"
Yep!
Sent with Good (www.good.com)
Jim Moise I Chief Customer Officer, EVP Sales, Marketing and Services I Good Technology I
jmoise@good.com I 0: 408.212.7347 M: 949.683.9845 I www.good.comI430 N. Mary Ave,
Suite 200, Sunnyvale, CA 94085
-----Original Message-----
From: Susan Vinci-Lucero
Sent: Friday, May 25, 2012 11:10 AM Pacific Standard Time
To: Jim Moise
Cc: Debbie Shotwell
Subject: Re: Work Discussion Summary
Debbie - here is final, agreed to by me and Jim!
Susan
*******************
I am summarizing the key points of the conversation we had on Thursday, May 17 regarding my current and
future employment status at Good:
1. I will be fully paid and receive full benefits, and my options and PTO will continue to vest/accrue per
both you and Debbie during the entire period I am undergoing cancer treatment. Every aspect of my
current compensation will remain in force throughout the course of my cancer treatment, just as if I
was continuing to work, including salary, all benefits, bonus eligibility, stock option vesting, and all
commute / living expenses associated with working in California, while permanently residing in New
Mexico.
2. I will return to my current position at the end of my cancer treatments, which at this point is expected
to be around late October 2012.
3. Other than to cover for my absence, any other organizational changes that affect my team during my
absence will be made in agreement between myself and Jim.
4. We will stay in touch every other week to ensure that I remain aware of and connected to what's
going on in the business and organization.
I made it clear to you, King and Debbie prior to and during our meeting that I intended to and am able to
continue to work during the course of my cancer treatments. You stated that this is not what you believe is
10/29/20122:33 PM
RE: Work Discussion Summary
2of6
best for the business. While I do not agree with your assessment and know that I would continue to add
value during my treatment, as do many people undergoing cancer treatment, given the summary agreement
above and the company's commitment to my return, I will comply with the terms agreed to in our meeting,
despite my reservations; through the end of my cancer treatments (estimated to be late October).
Susan E. Vinci-Lucero I SVP Marketing I Good Technology
svinci-Iucero@good.com 10: 650.486.6975 I M: 650.339.6225 I www.good.com
cid:image001.jpg@OlCB3994.0CC9·
From: Jim Moise <jmoise@good.com>
Date: Thu, 24 May 2012 16:07:52 -0700
To: Microsoft Office User <svinci-Iucero@good.com>
Cc: Debbie Shotwell <dshotwel!@good.com>
Subject: RE: Work Discussion Summary
Hi Susan
Item 3 looks great. AI! set.
I'!i ask Maggie to coordinate calendars for our bi-weekly meetings.
Thx
Jim
From: Susan Vinci-Lucero
Sent: Thursday, May 24,20121:28 PM
To: Jim Moise
Cc: Debbie Shotwell
Subject: Re: Work Discussion Summary
Thanks Jim. Below is what I propose to item # 3, embedded in full text. I think my replacement can certainly make
recommendations and discuss with you, but any decisions should be agreed between you and I (not you and the
replacement only).
Thursday's or Friday's are fine, except we will have to schedule on my off-chemo weeks. My chemo's are scheduled
on thursdays and Friday's might be dicier. (this week was an exception with chemo on Wed.) So, we'll do the off
weeks.
Look forward to talking hopefully later today.
Susan
***********************
Jim,
I am summarizing the key points of the conversation we had on Thursday, May 17 regarding my current and
future employment status at Good:
1. I will be fully paid and receive full benefits, and my options and PTO will continue to vest/accrue per
10/29/20122:33 PM
RE: Work Discussion Summary
30f6
both you and Debbie during the entire period I am undergoing cancer treatment. Every aspect of my
current compensation will remain in force throughout the course of my cancer treatment, just as if I
was continuing to work, including salary, all benefits, bonus. eligibility, stock option vesting, and all
commute / living expenses associated with working in California, while permanently residing in New
Mexico.
2. I will return to my current position at the end of my cancer treatments, which at this point is expected
to be around late October 2012.
3. Other than to cover for my absence, any other organizational changes that affect my team during my
absence will be made in agreement between myself and Jim.
4. We will stay in touch every other week to ensure that I remain aware of and connected to what's
going on in the business and organization.
I made it clear to you, King and Debbie prior to and during our meeting that I intended to and am able to
continue to work during the course of my cancer treatments. You stated that this is not what you believe is
best for the business. While I do not agree with your assessment and know that I would continue to add
value during my treatment, as do many people undergoing cancer treatment, given the summary agreement
above and the company's to my return, I will comply with the terms agreed to in our meeting,
despite my reservations, through the end of my cancer treatments (estimated to be late October).
Please confirm that you have received this email as soon as possible.
Regards,
Susan
Susan E. Vinci-Lucero I SVP Marketing I Good Technology
svinci-Iucero@good.com 10: 650.486.6975 I M: 650.339.6225 I www.good.com
cid:image001.jpg@OlCB3994.0CC9
From: Jim Moise <jmoise@good.com>
Date: Thu, 24 May 201213:16:59 -0700
To: Microsoft Office User <svinci-Iucero@good.com>
Cc: Debbie Shotwell
Subject: RE: Work Discussion Summary
Hi Susan,
Oooops. Copied your original instead of my updates. Here is the full set again, with my comments in bold
in line 3.
1. I will be fully paid and receive full benefits, and my options and PTO will continue to vest/accrue per
both you and Debbie during the entire period I am undergoing cancer treatment. Every aspect of my
current compensation will remain in force throughout the course of my cancer treatment, just as if I
was continuing to work, including salary, all benefits, bonus eligibility, stock option vesting, and all
commute / living expenses associated with working in California, while permanently residing in New
Mexico.
2. I will return to my current position at the end of my cancer treatments, which at this point is expected
to be around late October 2012.
10/29/20122:33 PM
RE: Work Discussion Summary
40f6
3. Organizational changes that affect my team during my absence will be made in agreement between
myself and Jim and/or my replacement throughout my absence.
4. We will stay in touch every other week to ensure that I remain aware of and connected to what's
going on in the business and organization.
I would like to do our bi-weekly updates Thursday or Friday mornings if you are ok with that. I have my 1:1
with Kirsten on Wed, and Exec staff is on Wed too. I can give you more current info with those meetings
under my belt. Fridays would be my preference. Let me know. On the phone, or "on-site" is fine. Everyone
would be glad to see you on-site, and that would be great.
Maggie is putting together a time this afternoon for you and I to talk after your doctor's appt, we can cover
the communication and any other open topics.
Talk to you in a few,
Thx
Jim
From: Susan Vinci-Lucero
Sent: Thursday, May 24,2012 10:13 AM
To: Jim Moise
Cc: Debbie Shotwell
Subject: Re: Work Discussion Summary
HiJim,
Thank you for responding.
In item 3, I do not see or notice any changes (in your reply) to reflect your preference. Please let me know what
wording you'd like to insert or change.
For bi-weekly meetings, we were having our weekly 1:1s on Monday afternoons and that time works well for me
still. I can ask Maggie to change that to bi-weekly if that works for you. We can do phone calls and for larger
reviews/subjects, just meet somewhere close to the office as needed. Let me know if that works.
Yes, I agree that something needs to be communicated and have been thinking that over. Let me know your
thoughts; my day is pretty open except a quick doctor's appt at 2:30.
With respect to the time off, I will spend the next few weekswinding down on loose ends such as req/PO approvals,
budget handling, etc. Then I will check out from daily work. Meantime, I will have to communicate that the
coverage plan I put in place when I left for surgery will remain in place until further notice, unless you have some
other ideas on that front. We can discuss.
Thanks, Susan
Susan E. Vinci-Lucero I SVP Marketing I Good Technology
svinci-Iucero@good.com 10: 650.486.6975 I M: 650.339.6225 I www.good.com
cid:i mage001.j pg@OlCB3994.0CCS
10/29/20122:33 PM
RE: Work Discussion Summary
50f6
From: Jim Moise <jmoise@good.com>
Date: Thu, 24 May 2012 07:24:47 -0700
To: Microsoft Office User <svinc;i-lucerQ@gQQd.com>
Cc: Debbie Shotwell <dshotwell@good.com>
Subject: RE: Work Discussion Summary
Hi Susan
Thank you for putting your thoughts together. I think they fairly summarize our discussion.
With respect to organizational changes, ! have clarified my preference in item 3 below. Please let me know
your thoughts.
With respect to item 4 below, when would you like to begin our bi-weekly meetings?
Lastly, I think it would be very important to formally communicate this revised arrangement to your team
and Executive Staff. I have some thoughts on this and would like to discuss them with you at your
convenience.
With each of these items addressed, I hope that during your time off you are able to focus on restoring your
health, and know that ail of us wish you a speedy and full recovery.
Thx
Jim
From: Susan Vinci-Lucero
Sent: Tuesday, May 22,201211:09 PM
To: Jim Moise
Cc: Debbie Shotwell
Subject: Work Discussion Summary
Jim,
I am summarizing the key points of the conversation we had on Thursday, May 17 regarding my
current and future employment status at Good:
1. I will be fully paid and receive full benefits, and my options and PTO will continue to
vest/accrue per both you and Debbie during the entire period I am undergoing cancer
treatment. Every aspect of my current compensation will remain in force throughout the
course of my cancer treatment, just as if I was continuing to work, including salary, all
benefits, bonus eligibility, stock option vesting, and all commute / living expenses associated
with working in California, while permanently residing in New Mexico.
2. I will return to my current position at the end of my cancer treatments, which at this point is
expected to be around late October 2012.
3. You will not make organizational changes that affect my team during my absence, other than
to cover for my absence.
4. We will stay in touch every other week to ensure that I remain aware of and connected to
what's going on in the business and organization.
10/29/20122:33 PM
RE: Work Discussion Summary
60f6
I made it clear to you, King and Debbie prior to and during our meeting that I intended to and am
able to continue to work during the course of my cancer treatments. You stated that this is not what
you believe isbest for the business. While I do not agree with your assessment and know that I
would continue to add value during my treatment, as do many people undergoing cancer treatment,
given the summary agreement above and the company's commitment to my return, I will comply
with the terms agreed to in our meeting, despite my reservations, through the end of my cancer
treatments (estimated to be late October).
Please confirm that you have received this email as soon as possible.
Regards,
Susan
Susan E. Vinci-Lucero I SVP Marketing I Good Technology
svinci-Iucero@good.com 10: 650.486.6975 I M: 650.339.6225 I www.good.com
cid:image001.jpg@OlC83994.0CCS
10/29/20122:33 PM
EXHIBITE
Re: Work Discussion Summary
10f4
Subject: Re: Work Discussion Summary
From: "Susan Vinci-Lucero"
Date: 5/23/20128:14 AM
To: "Debbie Shotwell"
Thank you for your support Debbie.
Susan
Susan E. Vinci-Lucero I SVP Marketing I Good Technolo[JY
svinci-Iucero@good.com 10: 650.486.6975 I M: 650.339.6225 I www.good.com
cid :image001.jpg@01CB3994.0CC9
From: Debbie Shotwell <dshotweU@good.com>
Date: Wed, 23 May 2012 08:10:40 -0700
To: Microsoft Office User <svinci-Iucero@good.com>
Subject: RE: Work Discussion Summary
Got it.
Jim received your note and requested a meeting with me to reply.
I appreciate your summary and your feelings.
Please take care. I heard you went to Yosemite this weekend. I hope it was beautiful and peaceful.
Thinking of you,
Debbie
From: Susan Vinci-Lucero
Sent: Tuesday, May 22,201211:25 PM
To: Debbie Shotwell
Subject: FW: Work Discussion Summary
Debbie,
In addition to the summary of my conversation with Jim on Thursday, May 17th (outlined in the
forwarded email below), Jim also specifically told me the following:
• That my continued presence during my treatment, my "comings and goings" were "bad for
business" and "disruptive for the team". He told me this multiple times.
10/29/20122:34 PM
Re: Work Discussion Summary
20f4
• That my team, as well as my peers, did not know who to go to or who was in charge and that
we can't have "three people running the Marketing department
IJ
,
• That I would be fully paid and compensated (as summarized below) during my cancer
treatment, but that I should not work or return to work until after my cancer treatments were
completed.
• That my cancer treatment would be a "long haul" for me, that the treatments were rough and
that he had a friend going through cancer treatment and that it was very tough on him.
• That he would not make any changes to the marketing department during my absence other
than to manage coverage during my absence.
• That any organizational or headcount related topics would be reviewed and discussed with
me.
• That he would find a way to stay in touch with me and keep me informed, by having l:l's with
me every other week or so.
• That I would return to my current role following my cancer treatments.
• That I need to find and hire one person to run the department during my absence.
I want to be clear that at no time during this conversation was I asked what I wanted or was I offered
any other option or discussion, other than as stated above. For the record:
• I was welcomed back to work with full support on Tuesday, May 15th. I have consistently
communicated with Jim and King my status and plans to return to work. Until this meeting on
the 17th, I had absolutely no indication that my return to work during iny medical treatment
was anything less than positive and desirable.
• The team and coverage plan I had quickly put in place while out for surgery and initial
treatment was vetted by King and approved by Jim. This plan was not intended to remain in
place throughout the course of my cancer treatment. It was meant to cover my department
short term, so I could quickly leave for surgery, assess my medical status and determine when I
could safely return to work. Once I returned to work, the intent was to phase out Kirsten and
Christine as co-managers of the department.
• Because I intended to return to work, I chose to have my chemo and radiation treatment in
California (versus New Mexico), primarily so I could continue working during treatment.
• I was advised by my oncologist that I would be able to return to work. I specifically scheduled
my chemo treatments so that the bulk of any time away from work would occur over the
course of every other weekend. This would have no more impact, and possibly less (in terms
of time out of the office) than my regular work commute to and from Santa Fe each week.
Debbie, as you are aware, my discussion with Jim came as a surprise to me as I have done everything
possible under the circumstances to ensure my department was covered in the short term until I
returned to work after the start of my cancer treatments following surgery. The decision to tell me
to not return to work was made without consultation or discussion with me and I am still struggling
to understand what prompted this sudden change between Tuesday when I was welcomed back
with full support and Thursday when I was told to discontinue working until my treatments were
completed. And I categorically disagree with, and the facts certainly DO NOT support any claim that
my presence at work is "bad for business" or "disruptive to the team". As I'm sure you're aware,
being female, over 40 and a cancer patient, I am in a protected status on three fronts; therefore, I
feel it is in my best interest to document this discussion with Jim and the resulting terms / status of
my employment.
Please let me know if you have any questions.
10/29/20122:34 PM
Re: Work Discussion Summary
30f4
Thank you.
Susan
Susan E. Vinci-Lucero I SVP Marketing I Good Technology
svinci-Iucero@good.com 10: 650.486.6975 I M: 650.339.6225 I www.good.com
cid:image001.jpg@OlCB3994.0CC9
From: Susan Vinci-Lucero
Sent: Tuesday, May 22,201211:08 PM
To: Jim Moise
Cc: Debbie Shotwell
Subject: Work Discussion Summary
Jim,
I am summarizing the key points of the conversation we had on Thursday, May 17 regarding my
current and future employment status at Good:
1. I will be fully paid and receive full benefits, and my options and PTO will continue to
vest/accrue per both you and Debbie during the entire period I am undergoing cancer
treatment. Every aspect of my current compensation will remain in force throughout the
course of my cancer treatment, just as if I was continuing to work, including salary, all
benefits, bonus eligibility, stock option vesting, and all commute / living expenses associated
with working in California, while permanently residing in New Mexico.
2. I will return to my current position at the end of my cancer treatments, which at this point is
expected to be around late October 2012.
3. You will not make organizational changes that affect my team during my absence, other than
to cover for my absence.
4. We will stay in touch every other week to ensure that I remain aware of and connected to
what's going on in the business and organization.
I made it clear to you, King and Debbie prior to and during our meeting that I intended to and am
able to continue to work during the course of my cancer treatments. You stated that this is not what
you believe is best for the business. While I do not agree with your assessment and know that I
would continue to add value during my treatment, as do many people undergoing cancer treatment,
given the summary agreement above and the company's commitment to my return, I will comply
with the terms agreed to in our meeting, despite my reservations, through the end of my cancer
treatments (estimated to be late October).
Please confirm that you have received this email as soon as possible.
Regards,
Susan
Susan E. Vinci-Lucero I SVP Marketing I Good Technology
svinci-Iucero@good.com 10: 650.486.6975 I M: 650.339.6225 I www.good.com
10/29/20122:34 PM
Re: Work Discussion Summary
cid:image001.jpg@OlCB3994.0CC9
40f4
10/29/20122:34 PM
EXHIBITF
RE: Susan Vinci Lucero -- Attorney-Client Privileged & Confidential
Subject: RE: Susan Vinci Lucero -- Attorney-Client Privileged & Confidential
From: IIDebbie Shotweli
ll
Date: 7/27/2012 11:21 AM
To: IISusan Vinci-Lucero
ll
! understand. let me know if you need anything.
Thank you ....
Debbie Shotwell I Vice President Global Human Resources I Good Technology I dshotwell@good.com I 0: 408-212-7406 I M:
925-963-51921 www.good.comI430N.MaryAve.Suite200.Sunnyvale.CA 94085
DesCl
De SCI
DesCl
From: Susan Vinci-Lucero
Sent: Friday, July 27,2012 11:18 AM
To: Debbie Shotwell
Subject: Re: Susan Vinci Lucero -- Attorney-Client Privileged & Confidential
Got it. I will keep the situation and everything discussed confidential. I need time to think about this. I had a
horrible night and the stress, especially at this point, is nearly overwhelming. I am clearly not ready to respond yet.
Thank you Debbie.
Susan
Susan E. Vinci-Lucero I SVP Marketing I Good Technology
svinci-Iucero@good.com 10: 650.486.6975 1 M: 650.339.62251 www.good.com
. cid:image001.jpg@01CB3994.0CC9·
From: Debbie Shotwell <dshotwell@good.com>
Date: Thu, 26 Jul 2012 21:57:22 -0700
To: Microsoft Office User <svinci-lucero@good.coJ}1>
Subject: Susan Vinci lucero -- Attorney-Client Privileged & Confidential
Dear Susan,
Thank you for taking the time to meet with us today. We want to be highly respectful of your circumstances
and address a very challenging situation in a way that both honors our relationship with you and serves the
needs of the company in the short term and long term.
As discussed, as an executive severance package upon termination, Good is currently prepared to offer you
the following:
1. 12 months base pay
10f2 10/29/20121:45 PM
RE: Susan Vinci Lucero -- Attorney-Client Privileged & Confidential
20f2
2. 12 months additional stock option vesting
3. 12 months post-separation to exercise your vested stock options
4. COBRA coverage for the legal maximum of 29 months
5. Good will continue to pay for your condo until your medical treatment is complete
If this is acceptable to you, we'll formalize it into a separation agreement that spells out the terms and
includes a release of potential claims. Because of the sensitivity and personal nature of this situation, atthis
time we are not disclosing anything to employees generally within the marketing department or elsewhere
in the company. We would greatly prefer to reach an agreement that you are comfortable with you in the
next 1-2 weeks so that there is closure. I am happy to answer any questions you have, and work with you as
and when convenient. When you are ready, I will personally take care of all the necessary paperwork and
reducing any burden on you.
Res pectfu Ily,
Debbie Shotwell
Attachment: Stock Option Worksheet
This email and any attachments thereto may contain private, confidential, and privileged material for
the sole use of the intended recipient. Any review, copying, or distribution of this email (or any
attachments thereto) by others is strictly prohibited. If you are not the intended recipient, please
contact the sender immediately and permanently delete the original and any copies of this email and
any attachments thereto.
10/29/20121:45 PM
EXHIBITG
RE: Checking in
10f2
Subject: RE: Checking in
From: IIDebbie Shotweli
ll
Date: 7/31/20129:03 PM
To: IISusan Vinci-lucero
ll
Hi Susan,
I will get everything together for you tomorrow.
Take care.
Debbie
Debbie Shotwell I Vice President Global Human Resources I Good Technology I dshotwell@good.com I 0: 408-212-7406 I M:
925-963-5192 I WW\I\!.good.cOJ!} I 430 N. Mary Ave, Suite 200, Sunnyvale, CA 94085
Oeser
Oeser
Oeser
From: Susan Vinci-Lucero
Sent: Tuesday, July 31, 2012 7:06 PM
To: Debbie Shotwell
Subject: RE: Checking in
Hi Debbie,
I do need some additional information, and will likely have a few more questions, before I can
respond to Good's severance offer.
Please send me the following, via PDF if possible:
1) A copy of my COBRA eligibility paperwork;
2) A copy of the 2006 Stock Plan and Stock Option Agreement applicable to my stock options (I do
not have a copy here in CAl;
3) A complete copy of my personnel file;
4) A copy of my payroll records.
The company's decision to terminate my employment while I am in the middle of my treatment has
been very unsettling for me, and I am going to need a bit more time to think all ofthis over, and
consider my options before I can put pen to paper on a response.
Thanks Debbie.
Susan
10/29/20121:45 PM
EXHIBIT I
STATE OF CALIFORNIA - STATE AND CONSUMER SERVICES AGENCY
f}t-
DEPARTMENT OF FAIR EMPLOYMENT & HOUSING
2218 Kausen Drive, Suite 100 I Elk Grove I CA I 95758
(800) 884-1684 I Videophone (916) 226-52851 TDD (800) 700-2320
www.dfeh.ca.gov I email: contact.center@dfeh.ca.gov
Oct 22,2012
Susan Vinci Lucero
1901 Cerros Colorados
Santa Fe, NM 87501
RE: 55005-26156 - VinciLucero Susan - Right To Sue
Notice of Case Closure and Right to Sue
Dear Susan VinciLucero:
GOVERNOR EDMUND G. BROWN JR.
DIRECTOR PHYLLIS W. CHENG
This letter informs you that the above-referenced complaint that was filed with the
Department of Fair Employment and Housing (DFEH) has been closed effective Oct 22,
2012 because an immediate Right to Sue notice was requested. DFEH will take no
further action on the complaint.
This letter is also your Right to Sue notice. According to Government Code section
12965, subdivision (b), a civil action may be brought under the provisions of the Fair
Employment and Housing Act against the person, employer, labor organization or
employment agency named in the above-referenced complaint. The civil action must be
filed within one year from the date of this letter.
To obtain a federal Right to Sue notice, you must visit the U.S. Equal Employment
Opportunity Commission (EEOC) to file a complaint within 30 days of receipt of this
DFEH Notice of Case Closure or within 300 days of the alleged discriminatory act,
whichever is earlier.
DFEH does not retain case files beyond three years after a complaint is filed, unless the
case is still open at the end of the three-year period.
Sincerely,
Department of Fair Employment and Housing
cc: David Russian, Agent for Service for VISTO CORPORATION
James Moise
Susan VinciLucero
CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF FAIR EMPLOYMENT AND HOUSING
EMPLOYMENT
COMPLAINT OF DISCRIMINATION UNDER THE PROVISIONS OF THE CALIFORNIA FAIR EMPLOYMENT AND HOUSING ACT
55005-26156
NAMED IS THE EMPLOYER, PERSON, LABOR ORGANIZATION, EMPLOYMENT AGENCY, APPRENTICESHIP COMMITIEE, OR
STATE OR LOCAL GOVERNMENT AGENCY WHO DISCRIMINATED AGAINST ME:
VISTO CORPORATION David Russian (866) 723-4663
430 N. Mary Ave. Sunnyvale, CA 94085
r ~ O .
450
James Moise
Ju126,2012
430 N. Mary Ave. Sunnyvale CA 94085
TOOk. PLACE:
Private Employer
! wish to pursue this matter in court. I hereby request that the Department of Fair Employment and Housing provide a right to sue. [ understand that if I want a federa! right to sue
notice, I must visit the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) to file a complaint within 30 days of receipt of the DFEH "Notice of Case Closure and Right to Sue,"
or within 300 days of the alleged discriminatory act, whichever is earlier.
I have not been coerced into making this request, nor do I make it based on fear of retaliation jf I do not do so. 1 understand it is the Department of Fair Employment and Housing's
policy to not process or reopen a complaint once the complaint has been closed on the basis of "Complainant Elected Court Action."
By submitting this complaint, I am declaring under penalty of perjury under the laws of the State of California that, to the best of my knowledge, all information contained in this
complaint is true and correct. except matters stated on my information and belief, and I declare that those matters I believe to be true.
October 26, 2012 At Santa Fe :Susan Vinci Lucero
DFEH-300-030 (07/12) ['itr'D: Oct 26,2012
STATE OF CALIFORNIA
DEPARTMENT OF FAIR EMPLOYMENT AND HOUSING
Page 1/2
Oct 26,2012
CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF FAIR EMPLOYMENT AND HOUSING
EMPLOYMENT
COMPLAINT OF DISCRIMINATION UNDER THE PROVISIONS OF THE CALIFORNIA FAIR EMPLOYMENT AND
HOUSING ACT
i /\.L.L.EC3F [ F..XFE.F<IE:NCFD;
Discrimination, Harassment, Retaliation

Ju126,2012
Disability - including HIV and AIDS, Engagement in Protected Activity, Family Care or Medical Leave, Medical
Condition - including Cancer
Denied a good faith interactive process, Denied a work environment free of discrimination
and/or retaliation, Denied employment, Denied family care or medical leave, Denied reasonable
accommodation, Denied reinstatement, Terminated
BF·:·l. if:,::,VE: TO br.:·: HE·:
From October 2010 to July 26, 2012, I was employed by Visto Corporation as Senior Vice President of Marketing. I oversaw the growth of
my department from 12 to nearly 50 employees during that span. For the calendar year 2011, my first full year of employment with Visto, I
achieved all of my MBOs and was awarded 100% of my potential bonus. I was diagnosed with stage 3 breast cancer in March 2012. I
informed Visto of my diagnosis and prepared a coverage plan for my department. I had surgery [double mastectomy] on March 27, 2012.
Visto did not provide me with written notice of my rights under the Family and Medical Leave Act or the California Family Rights Act. I
continued to work regularly while I was ostensibly "taking time off' to recover from my surgery. I returned to the office /work on May 15,
2012. I scheduled my chemotherapy appointments to minimize the impact they would have on my work schedule. On May 17, 2012,
James Moise, my supervisor, informed me that my return to work was "not working," that it was too confusing to the team, that my coming
and going for medical appointments was "bad for business" and "disruptive to the team." He made these statements multiple times during
the meeting, which was extremely upsetting to me. Moise informed me that I was not to come to work and not to work frorn home. I stated
that I was ready, willing, and able to work, but it made no difference. On May 22,2012, I sent an email to James Moise and Debbie
Shotwell, confirming what Moise had said to me at the May 17 meeting. Also on May 22,2012, I sent an email to Debbie Shotwell
complaining about Moise's statements and conduct. On May 23,2012, I was in the middle of a chemotherapy appointment when King
Lee, CEO of Visto, called me on my cell phone and angrily berated me, stating that he needed to talk to me right now. I believe that this
angry, upsetting telephone call was in retaliation for my memorializing Moise's conduct and complaining about it to Debbie Shotwell. On
July 18, 2012, my assistant informed me that Debbie Shotwell wanted to meet with me. We scheduled a lunch meeting for July 26, 2012.
On the morning of July 26,2012, my assistant telephoned me and informed me that CEO King Lee would also be attending the lunch.
When I arrived at the lunch with Debbie Shotwell, CEO Lee was not present yet. After we finished ou·r lunch, CEO Lee arrived and asked
Ms. Shotwell to leave. When CEO Lee and I were alone, Lee informed me that it was time for me to go, and that I needed to leave the
company. CEO Lee stated that Moise had made the decision and that Lee agreed. Lee informed me that the company was making me a
severance offer. I asked Lee if I could have the offer in writing and he agreed. I then told Lee that I needed to think about the offer, at
which point Lee got up, grabbed the check, and left.
DFEH-300-030 (07/12)
Oct 26,2012
STATE OF CALIFORNIA
DEPARTMENT OF FAIR EMPLOYMENT AND HOUSING
Page 2/2
Oct 26, 2012
STATE OF CALIFORNIA - STATE AND CONSUMER SERVICES AGENCY GOVERNOR EDMUND G. BROWN JR.
lr.- ..."..,..
DEPARTMENT OF FAIR EMPLOYMENT & HOUSING
DIRECTOR PHYlliS W. CHENG
2218 Kausen Drive, Suite 100 1 Elk Grove 1 CA 195758
(800) 884-1684 1 Videophone (916) 226-52851 TDD (800) 700-2320
www.dfeh.ca.gov 1 email: contact.center@dfeh.ca.gov
October 26,2012
RE: 55005-26156 - Vinci Lucero Susan - Right To Sue
Notice of Filing of Discrimination Complaint
Enclosed is a copy of a complaint that has been filed with the Department of Fair
Employment and Housing (DFEH) in accordance with Government Code section 12960.
This constitutes service of the complaint pursuant to Government Code section 12962.
Complainant has requested an authorization to file a lawsuit. This complaint is not being
investigated and is being closed immediately. A copy of the closing letter and right to
sue is enclosed for your records.
NO RESPONSE TO DFEH IS REQUESTED OR REQUIRED.
Please see the next page for the Respondent(s) name and address
Page 1/2
STATE OF CALIFORNIA - STATE AND CONSUMER SERVICES AGENCY GOVERNOR EDMUND G. BROWN JR.
DEPARTMENT OF FAIR EMPLOYMENT & HOUSING
2218 Kausen Drive, Suite 100 1 Elk Grove 1 CA 1 95758
(800) 884-1684 1 Videophone (916) 226-52851 TOO (800) 700-2320
www.dfeh.ca.gov 1 email: contact.center@dfeh.ca.gov
October 26, 2012
RE: 55005-26156 - Vinci Lucero Susan - Right To Sue
Notice of Filing of Discrimination Complaint
David Russian Agent for Service for VISTO
CORPORATION
430 N. Mary Ave.
Sunnyvale CA 94085
James Moise
430 N. Mary Ave.
Sunnyvale CA 94085
DIRECTOR PHYLLIS W. CHENG
Page 2/2
STATE OF CALIFORNIA - STATE AND CONSUMER SERVICES AGENCY
DEPARTMENT OF FAIR EMPLOYMENT & HOUSING
2218 Kausen Drive, Suite 100 1 Elk Grove 1 CA 195758
(800) 884-1684 1 Videophone (916) 226-52851 TDD (800) 700-2320
www.dfeh.ca.gov 1 email: contact.center@dfeh.ca.gov
October 26,2012
Scott Bonagofsky
111 Deerwood Road, Suite 200
San Ramon CA 94583
RE: 55005-26156 - Vinci Lucero Susan - Right To Sue
NOTICE TO COMPLAINANT'S ATTORNEY
GOVERNOR EDMUND G. BROWN JR
DIRECTOR PHYLLIS W. CHENG
Attached is a copy of your client's complaint of discrimination filed with the Department
of Fair Employment and Housing (DFEH) pursuant to the California Fair Employment
and Housing Act, Government Code section 12900, et seq. Also attached is a copy of
your client's Notice of Case Closure, which constitutes your client's right-to-sue notice.
Pursuant to Government Code section 12962, DFEH will not serve these documents on
the employer.
Please refer to the attached Notice of Case Closure and Right to Sue for information
regarding filing a private lawsuit in the State of California.
Sincerely,
Department of Fair Employment and Housing

Sign up to vote on this title
UsefulNot useful