Vol. LIX Allentown, PA Friday, April 16, 2021 No. 42

502G.B. vs. Jade Nails Hair Spa et al.Associates (“Larken”), the purported landlord of the propertyrented by Jade Nails. Before the Court is Defendant Larken’s motion to dismiss for failure to state a claim. ECF No. 12. For thefollowing reasons, the Court grants Defendant Larken’s Motion toDismiss without prejudice, with leave for Plaintiff to amend theComplaint.1I. FACTUAL ALLEGATIONS2In December 2017, G.B. was visiting family in Allentown,Pennsylvania, when she decided to get a massage for her neck andback pain. Compl. ¶¶11-13, ECF No. 1. She went to Nails, a spathat rented space from Larken.3 Id. ¶77. A male masseuse, AllenNhin (“Nhin”), offered to perform the massage. Id. ¶14. The massage started normally, but Nhin then started massaging G.B.’sbreasts. Id. ¶16. He touched her nipples and proceeded down herbody until he reached her genitalia. Id. ¶¶17-20. At that point,G.B. forcibly stopped Nhin from touching her genitalia any further.Id. ¶20. “[S]cared, frightened, and hoping for a quick end to thisoutrageous behavior,” G.B. waited until Nhin completed the massage before she left Jade Nails. Id. ¶21.G.B. ultimately reported the incident to the Allentown PoliceDepartment in December 2018. Id. ¶¶22-26. The AllentownSpecial Victim’s Unit began an investigation, during which G.B.1The court should freely give leave to amend the complaint when justice so requires.Fed. R.Civ.P. 15(a)(2). With regards to complaints subject to dismissal under Rule12(b)(6), “a district court must permit a curative amendment, unless such an amendmentwould be inequitable or futile.” Phillips v. Cnty. of Allegheny, 515 F.3d 224, 236 (3d Cir.2008).2In reviewing this motion, the Court “accept[s] all factual allegations as true” and“construe[s] the complaint in the light most favorable to the plaintiff.” Warren Gen. Hosp.v. Amgen Inc., 643 F.3d 77, 84 (3d Cir. 2011) (quoting Pinker v. Roche Holdings Ltd., 292F.3d 361, 374 n.7 (3d Cir. 2002)).3Larken disputes this allegation, claiming instead that “the landlord for the premises rented by Defendant Jade Spa was Hanover Avenue Partners, LLC.” Def.’s Mot. 5,ECF No. 12-1. Larken apparently provided this information, alongside “a copy of the appropriate lease,” to G.B.’s counsel. Id. The “appropriate lease” is not attached to Larken’smotion and, in any event, the Court need not resolve the motion on the basis of mistakenidentity. See Strike 3 Holdings, LLC v. Doe, No. 1:18-cv-2674-NLH-JS, 2020 WL 3567282,at *6 (D.N.J. June 30, 2020) (“[D]etermining whether the defendant named in an action isin fact the defendant against whom liability will ultimately stand necessarily implicates ananalysis of material outside the four-corners of the complaint, and considering whether thepled defendant is the wrong defendant at the pleading stage is inappropriate.”).12Lehigh 7-17 op

G.B. vs. Jade Nails Hair Spa et al.503learned that Nhin had previously been sentenced to probation fora similar incident. Id. ¶¶27-33.II. LEGAL STANDARDTo survive a motion to dismiss under Federal Rule of CivilProcedure 12(b)(6), “a complaint must contain sufficient factualmatter, accepted as true, to ‘state a claim to relief that is plausibleon its face.’ ” Ashcroft v. Iqbal, 556 U.S. 662, 678 (2009) (quotingBell Atl. Corp. v. Twombly, 550 U.S. 544, 570 (2007)). A claim isfacially plausible, and survives dismissal, “when the plaintiff pleadsfactual content that allows the court to draw the reasonable inference that the defendant is liable for the misconduct alleged.” Id.(citing Twombly, supra at 556); see also, Great W. Mining & Min.Co. v. Fox Rothschild LLP, 615 F.3d 159, 177 (3d Cir. 2010) (“[T]here must be some showing sufficient to justify moving the casebeyond the pleadings to the next stage of litigation.” (quoting Phillips v. Cnty. of Allegheny, 515 F.3d 224, 234-35 (3d Cir. 2008))).Courts in the Third Circuit evaluate the sufficiency of a complaint under a three-step framework. The court must first “tak[e]note of the elements [the] plaintiff must plead to state a claim.”Connelly v. Lane Const. Corp., 809 F.3d 780, 787 (3d Cir. 2016)(quoting Iqbal, supra at 675). Next, the court “should identify allegations that, ‘because they are no more than conclusions, are notentitled to the assumption of truth.’ ” Id. (quoting Iqbal, supra at679); see also, Burtch v. Milberg Factors, Inc., 662 F.3d 212, 224(3d Cir. 2011) (“[M]ere restatements of the elements of [a] claim[] . are not entitled to the assumption of truth.” (internal quotationmarks and citations omitted)). Finally, “[w]hen there are wellpleaded factual allegations, [the] court should assume their veracity and then determine whether they plausibly give rise to an entitlement to relief.” Connelly, supra (quoting Iqbal, supra).III. DISCUSSIONG.B. brings one claim against Larken under Pennsylvania’shuman trafficking statute. She alleges that Larken is liable becauseit not only knew (or should have known) about Nhin’s prior arrestfor a sex crime, but also because it “profited from” G.B.’s assaultat Jade Nails. See Compl. ¶¶76-80, ECF No. 1. Larken contendsthat G.B. has not “alleged facts that support a claim that she was13Lehigh 7-17 op

G.B. vs. Jade Nails Hair Spa et al.504subjected to human trafficking.” Def.’s Mot. 16, ECF No. 12-1. Inthe alternative, Larken argues that it falls within the safe harborprovision of the Pennsylvania statute and so cannot be held liable.See id. at 13-15. The Court agrees with Larken and finds that G.B.has failed to state a claim for which relief can be granted.Our first task is to identify the elements G.B. must plead tostate her claim against Larken. See Connelly, supra. Under Pennsylvania’s human trafficking statute, “[a]n individual who is a victimof the sex trade may bring a civil action . against a person that .recruits, profits from or maintains the victim in any sex trade act.”18 Pa. Cons. Stat. §3051(a)(2)(i). As relevant here, the statutedefines a “victim of the sex trade” as an individual who has “beenintended or compelled to engage in a sex act.” Id. §3051(k). A “sexact” is further defined as any “touching or exposure of the sexualor other intimate parts of any individual for the purpose of gratifying sexual desire of any individual.” Id. §3001. And “sex trade” isdefined as “[a]n act, which if proven beyond a reasonable doubt,could support a conviction for violation or attempted violation ofChapter 59 (relating to public indecency) or section 6312 (relatingto sexual abuse of children).” Id. §3051(k).At the outset, the parties dispute whether G.B. qualifies as avictim eligible to sue under the statute. Larken argues that G.B. isnot a victim of human trafficking. Def.’s Mot. 9-13, ECF No. 12-1.But, as G.B. correctly recognizes (Pl.’s Opp’n 9-10, ECF No. 16),Larken is focusing on the wrong section of the statute. The statutedistinguishes between, and creates separate causes of action for, a“victim of human trafficking” and a “victim of the sex trade.” 18Pa. Cons. Stat. §§3051(a)(1)-(2). It also provides separate definitions of a “victim of human trafficking” and a “victim of the sextrade.” Compare id. §3001 (defining “victim of human trafficking”),with id. §3051(k) (defining “victim of the sex trade”).4 G.B. bringsher claim as a “victim of the sex trade,” so we evaluate her complaintagainst that section of the statute.Under Pennsylvania law, a “victim of human trafficking” is an “individual who hasbeen subjected to human trafficking.” 18 Pa. Cons. Stat. §3001. In short, a person “has beensubjected to human trafficking” if they have been placed in involuntary servitude, laborservitude, or sexual servitude.” See id. §§3001, 3011, 3012. G.B. brings her claim as a“victim of the sex trade,” so we need not decide whether she meets the statutory definitionof a “victim of human trafficking.”414Lehigh 7-17 op

G.B. vs. Jade Nails Hair Spa et al.505Having set forth the elements of G.B.’s claim, we now turnto the factual allegations in her complaint. G.B. contends thatLarken “knew or should have known that Nhin had previously beenarrested for similar sexual crimes occurring on their premises inJuly of 2016.” Compl. ¶78, ECF No. 1. Larken, as Jade Nails’slandlord, allegedly “profited from the acts suffered by” G.B. Id.¶¶77, 79. These “threadbare recitals of the elements of a cause ofaction, supported by mere conclusory statements,” cannot supporta claim under Pennsylvania’s human trafficking law. Santiago v.Warminster Twp., 629 F.3d 121, 131 (3d Cir. 2010) (quoting Iqbal,supra at 678). We cannot reasonably infer that Larken “profited”from any “sex trade act”5 that occurred at Jade Nails, so we dismissthe complaint on this basis.Further, an entity is liable under the Pennsylvania state lawif it “knowingly markets or provides its goods or services to a person” who has engaged in sex trafficking. 18 Pa. Cons. Stat. §3051(b)(1) (emphasis added). Assuming that Larken “provides goods orservices to the general public,” G.B. does not plead facts demonstrating that Larken had actual knowledge of the alleged sex trafficking activities. Id. §3051(b). At most, G.B. pleads that Larkenhad constructive knowledge of Nhin’s prior sex crimes. This isinsufficient under the statute. See A.B. v. Marriott Int’l, Inc., 455F. Supp. 3d 171, 199 (E.D. Pa. 2020) (finding that allegations supporting “constructive knowledge” do not establish civil liabilityunder the Pennsylvania statute). “The Pennsylvania statute doesnot include ‘should have known’ language.” Id. at 201.IV. CONCLUSIONFor the foregoing reasons, Defendant Larken’s Motion toDismiss is granted. Plaintiff will have the opportunity to amendthe Complaint and allege with sufficient particularity facts supporting the allegation that Defendant Larken had actual knowledgeAs noted above, the Pennsylvania statute does not define “sex trade act,” but it doesdefine “sex trade” as “[a]n act, which if proven beyond a reasonable doubt, could supporta conviction for violation or attempted violation of Chapter 59 (relating to public indecency) or section 6312 (relating to sexual abuse of children).” 18 Pa. Cons. Stat. §3051(k).Without minimizing the disturbing nature of G.B.’s allegations, we cannot reasonably inferthat G.B. was subjected to an act that meets this statutory definition.515Lehigh 7-17 op

506G.B. vs. Jade Nails Hair Spa et al.of sex trafficking on the premises. Accordingly, the Complaint isdismissed without prejudice. An appropriate order follows.ORDERAND NOW on this 15th day of March, 2021, upon consideration of Defendant Larken Associates’ motion to dismiss (ECFNo. 12), and Plaintiff G.B.’s response in opposition (ECF No. 16),it is hereby ORDERED that the motion is GRANTED as follows:1. Count 8 of Plaintiff ’s Complaint (18 PA. CONS. STAT.§ 3051(a)(2)(i)) is DISMISSED without prejudice.16Lehigh 7-17 op

NewsLine April 16, 2021Bar Association of Lehigh County Building*All Are Required to Wear a Mask to Enter the Building &Social Distancing Guidelines are Still in Place! *Please continue to use email addresses below for bestcommunications:Lehigh Law Journal: publications@lehighbar.orgMembership: membership@lehighbar.orgLawyer Referral: lrs@lehighbar.orgEvents, Room Rentals, Committee Meeting RoomBookings: kmesch@thebarristersclub.comElectronic versions of The Lehigh Law Journalat http://lehighbar.org/resources/law-journal/Or https://www.palegalads.org/(Statewide Data Base)*For Most Up to Date Court Procedures and PBAUpdates, check their websites:Lehigh County: https://www.lccpa.org/Northampton County: https://www.nccpa.org/Pennsylvania Bar Association Covid- 19 Resource ons/COVID-19Resources-Guide

NewsLine 2Online CLE is Now Available!!!Contact Nancy at cle@lehighbar.orgOr go to lehighbar.org for details!Need Presenters for our Online CLEPlatformAll interested parties, contact Nancyat cle@lehighbar.org*The CLE Dept. is hard at work providing you withoptions for your CLE Requirements. Many WebinarOptions available!See www.lehighbar.org , CLE, CLE Seminar Schedule!

CLE UPDATE for the week of: April 16, 2021CLE VIDEO COMPLIANCE CAMP: Session #1Tuesday, April 20, 2021Earn up to 4 Substantive & 2 Ethics credits in one day.Pre-Registration Strongly EncouragedAt the end of each compliance period, the CLE department at TheBar Association of Lehigh County provides the opportunity forlawyers to earn up to 6 CLE credits in one day through our “VideoCompliance Camp” program. A series of 6 videos, originally tapedduring live seminars held at BALC, are re-played for viewers toearn one credit for each video. Pick and choose however manyyou care to view. Add these credits to the 6 possible credits youcan earn at Video Compliance Camp Session #2 and you can fulfillan entire year’s CLE requirements.If you attended any of these seminars live, or viewed theDVD’s in the past, you still qualify to earnCLE credit at this offering.The tuition for EACH one-credit program is 30.00.To register: FAX the form below; 610.770.9826E-mail: cle@lehighbar.org orCall: Nancy @ 610.433.6401 Ext: 16Video Compliance Camp: Session #1April 20, 2021NAME:PaSUP.Ct.ID#:Phone:E-mail:Member of the Bar Association of:[ ] Lehigh[ ] Northampton[ ] Other[ ] 9:00 AM - “Talkin’ Baseball: Curt Flood, the Reserve Clauseand Free Agency”; 1 Substantive Credit[ ] 10:10 AM - “Lawyers’ Ethics and Luzerne County: Why LuzerneCould Happen Again”; 1 Ethics Credit[ ] 11:20 AM - “The Trial of Aaron Burr”; 1 Substantive Credit[ ] 12:30 PM – “UM and UIM Claims ”; 1 Substantive Credit[ ] 1:40 PM - “Recent Developments in Attorney Ethics andProfessional Responsibility”; 1 Ethics Credit[ ] 2:50 PM - “John Marshall and the Birth of AmericanConstitutional Law”; 1 Substantive Credit

CLE Update 2BALC WEBINAR“TCAP: Providing Your Clients with aSecond Chance”Presented by: Natalie Doggett, BS, CRS, andTCAP Probation Officer, Brandy BeckFriday, April 23, 202112:00 PM – 1:00 PM1 Substantive CreditTuition: 15.00To Register Email: cle@lehighbar.orgThe Lehigh County Treatment Continuum Alternative Program(TCAP) was established in 1997 and has been aiding offenders inthe rehabilitation and reintegration process since its inception.TCAP is an IPP program that offers diversionary sentencing tolevel two, three, and four offenders. The program offers acontinuum of services to include residential and outpatient drugand alcohol treatment programming, case management, andsupervision. The collaboration between Lehigh County Probationand Treatment Trends Inc., promotes the utilization of a teamapproach to provide individualized client care. Contrary to othertreatment modalities and alternative programs, the TCAPcontinuum aligns addiction and criminality to treat the individualas a whole; the criminality aspect is used as a catalyst for change,teaching pro-social skills and ultimately reducing the likelihood ofrecidivism.Natalie Doggett, BS, CRS, is the Director of Forensic CaseManagement Services at Treatment Trends Incorporated. She hasa background in both the Drug and Alcohol and the CriminalJustice fields. Prior to her current role, Natalie served as aJuvenile Probation Officer, a Clinical Assessor, Case Manager, andCRS Supervisor. Natalie currently oversees case management forLehigh County TCAP, Northampton County TCAP, and LehighCounty Drug Court. Natalie received her Bachelor’s Degree inCriminal Justice and Economics from West Chester University.She is enrolled in a Master’s program at Wilmington University andwill graduate with her MS in Human Services with a CaseManagement Certificate in May 2021. She is a member of the TauUpsilon Alpha Honor Society located within the NationalOrganization of Human Services.Natalie is a credentialedCertified Recovery Specialist (CRS).Please try to sign up for BALC webinars at least more than½ hour before the program. 30 minutes prior to anywebinar I am in a practice session with the Presenters andnot in my office.Thank you.Nancy

CLE Update 3CLE VIDEO COMPLIANCE CAMP: Session #2Tuesday, April 27, 2021Earn up to 4 Substantive & 2 Ethics credits in one day.All Courses Approved for CLE CreditAt the end of each compliance period, the CLE department at TheBar Association of Lehigh County provides the opportunity forlawyers to earn up to 6 CLE credits in one day through our “VideoCompliance Camp” program. A series of 6 videos, originally tapedduring live seminars held at BALC, are re-played for viewers toearn one credit for each video. Pick and choose however manyyou care to view.If you attended any of these seminars live, or viewed theDVD’s in the past, you still qualify to earnCLE credit at this offering.The tuition for EACH one-credit program is 30.00To register: FAX the form below; 610.770.9826E-mail: cle@lehighbar.org orCall: Nancy @ 610.433.6401 Ext: 16Video Compliance Camp: Session #2April 27, 2021NAME:PaSUP.Ct.ID#:Phone:E-mail:Member of the Bar Association of:[ ] Lehigh[ ] Northampton[ ] Other[ ] 9:00 AM - “Chief Justice Roger B. Taney’s Tenure as SupremeCourt Justice and His ”; 1 Substantive Credit[ ] 10:10 AM - “Everything You Ever Wanted to Know aboutImpaired Lawyers and Judges”; 1 Ethics Credit[ ] 11:20 AM - “The Trial of John Brown and the Last Steptowards Civil War in America”; 1 Substantive Credit[ ] 12:30 PM – “Toxicology 101”; 1 Substantive Credit[ ] 1:40 PM - “Thaddeus Stevens and the Radical RepublicansImpact on the American ”; 1 Substantive Credit[ ] 2:50 PM - “The Golden Rule in Pennsylvania’s Code ofCivility”; 1 Ethics CreditAll Video Offerings at thisVideo Compliance Camp sessionCount as Live Credits for Pennsylvania

CLE Update 4BALC WEBINAR“Cash Bail Reform Forum”Sponsored by:the Lehigh Valley Justice InstitutePanelists: Hon. Glenn A. Grant, Roseanne Scotti,Esq.Alex Domingos and Moderated by Gary Asteak, Esq.Thursday, April 29, 20217:00 PM – 9:00 PM2 Substantive CreditsTuition: 20.00To Register Email: cle@lehighbar.org100 Maximum AttendanceSeveral years ago, New Jersey passed groundbreaking legislationto overhaul its bail laws and practices, and the results show that ithas been a resounding success. Two of the principal architects ofthat reform, Judge Glenn Grant and Attorney Roseanne Scotti, willdiscuss why the reforms were needed, how they helped get thempassed, and how those statewide reforms can inform how wereform bail in Pennsylvania, at the local level right now, andthorough statewide legislation over the long term.In addition, Alex Domingos of the ACLU of Pennsylvania, willdiscuss how bail works on the local level with an eye towardoutlining immediate changes that can be made at the county levelby District Justices, District Attorneys, and Judges of the CommonPleas courts.The Honorable Glenn A. Grant, J.A.D., was appointed by ChiefJustice Stuart Rabner as Director of the New Jersey AdministrativeOffice of the Courts on September 1, 2008. Under the leadershipan

Bar As sociation of Lehigh Cou nty includes year’s subscription to Lehigh Law Journal. Printed at 206 S. Keystone Ave., Sayre PA 18840 Periodical postage paid at Allentown, PA 18102 and at additional mailing offices. POSTMASTER: Send address changes to The Lehigh Law Journal, 1114 W. Walnut St., Allentown, PA 18102.