Skip Navigation LinksHome > Clinical Programs > Human Trafficking Cases > Case Display

Case View

 

 Case Documents

 
There are no documents to display for this case.

 

 Case Links - links to external documents

 
Link to Document

 
Case Details

  
CASE NAME:Panwar v. Access Therapies, Inc
ALL PLAINTIFFS:Rituraj Singh Panwar, Michael Richard Bautista Agustin
ALL DEFENDANTS:Access Therapies, Inc, RN Staff Inc d/b/a Rehability Care, Harvinder Dhani, Manuel Garcia, Ramon Villegas
CITATION:
DOCKET NUMBER:No. 1:12-cv-00619
SOURCE:Bloomberg, Lexis Search
TYPE OF CASE:Civil
RELATED CASE CITATION:
TYPE OF TRIAL:Judge
TRIAL JUDGE(S):Tanya Walton Pratt
YEAR OF ARREST:
YEAR OF VERDICT:
TYPE OF COURT:Federal
STATE:Indiana
FEDERAL DISTRICT:Southern District Court
STATE COUNTY:
AGE OF VICTIM(S):Adult
NUMBER OF VICTIMS:2 +
GENDER OF VICTIM(S):Male
VICTIM'S COUNTRY OF ORIGIN:India, Philippines
METHOD OF ENTRY INTO THE U.S.:H-1B visa
WAS VICTIM CHARGED WITH A CRIME:No
NUMBER OF DEFENDANT(S):5
GENDER OF DEFENDANT(S):Male
TYPE OF INDUSTRY:Labor
CASE CATEGORIZATION:Health Care Staffing
FIRST CHARGE:
FIRST CHARGE US/STATE CODE CITATION:
FIRST CHARGE VERDICT/PLEA:Unknown
FIRST CHARGE SENTENCE:
SECOND CHARGE:
SECOND CHARGE US/STATE CODE CITATION:
SECOND CHARGE VERDICT/PLEA:
SECOND CHARGE SENTENCE:
THIRD CHARGE:
THIRD CHARGE US/STATE CODE CITATION:
THIRD CHARGE VERDICT/PLEA:
THIRD CHARGE SENTENCE:
FOURTH CHARGE:
FOURTH CHARGE US/STATE CODE CITATION:
FOURTH CHARGE VERDICT/PLEA:
FOURTH CHARGE SENTENCE:
FIFTH CHARGE:
FIFTH CHARGE US/STATE CODE CITATION:
FIFTH CHARGE VERDICT/PLEA:
FIFTH CHARGE SENTENCE:
CORE TERMS:
SENTENCING OPINION CITATION:
LENGTH OF GREATEST SENTENCE:
RESTITUTION REQUIRED:
FINE IMPOSED:
FORFEITURE IMPOSED:
FIRST CLAIM:Violation of the Racketeering Influenced and Corrupt Organization Act
FIRST CLAIM US/STATE CODE CITATION:18 U.S.C. § 1962
FIRST CLAIM RESULT:Dismissed
DAMAGES AWARDED FOR FIRST CLAIM:
SECOND CLAIM:Violation of Trafficking Victims Protection Act
SECOND CLAIM US/STATE CODE CITATION:18 U.S.C. § 1589
SECOND CLAIM RESULT:
DAMAGES AWARDED FOR SECOND CLAIM:
THIRD CLAIM:Violation of Indiana Statutory Wage Law
THIRD CLAIM US/STATE CODE CITATION:Indiana Code 22-2-5-1
THIRD CLAIM RESULT:
DAMAGES AWARDED FOR THIRD CLAIM:
FOURTH CLAIM:Breach of Contract under Indiana Common Law
FOURTH CLAIM US/STATE CODE CITATION:
FOURTH CLAIM RESULT:
DAMAGES AWARDED FOR FOURTH CLAIM:
FIFTH CLAIM:Unjust Enrichment under Indiana Common Law
FIFTH CLAIM US/STATE CODE CITATION:
FIFTH CLAIM RESULT:Dismissed
DAMAGES AWARDED FOR FIFTH CLAIM:
SIXTH CLAIM:Violation of the Anti-Retaliation Provision of the Fair Labor Standards Act
SIXTH CLAIM US/STATE CODE CITATION:29 U.S.C. §215
SIXTH CLAIM RESULT:Dismissed
DAMAGES AWARDED FOR SIXTH CLAIM:
TOTAL AWARD:
APPEAL:
EXPLANATION OF APPEAL:
APPELLATE OPINION CITATION:
HOLDING OF APPEALS COURT:
APPEAL STILL PENDING?:No
SUMMARY:

Defendants recruit potential H-1B employees both abroad, primarily in India and the Phillipines, and domestically by recruiting foreign students in the US.  Defendants hire these individuals to work for healthcare companies and secure H-1B visas for them.  Defendants used coercion and threats of serious financial harm to keep plaintiffs employed with the company, including the threat of having their visas revoked and being in debt to defendants under the $20,000 promissory note each employee had to sign.  As of March 2014, the case was in the discovery stage.

Approval Status:Approved
Approver Comments:
            
EDIT

 

 

 

 

 

 

 
Michigan Law Wordmark Print View