Jerry Painadath v. Thomas Jefferson University Hospital

── Jerry Painadath v. Thomas Jefferson University Hospital ── Court: Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit Date: April 22, 2026 Category: General NOT PRECEDENTIAL UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE THIRD CIRCUIT ___________ No. 25-3578 ___________ JERRY J. PAINADATH, Appellant v. THOMAS JEFFERSON UNIVERSITY HOSPITALS; JEFFERSON EINSTEIN HOSPITAL ____________________________________ On Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania (E.D. Pa. Civil Action No. 2:24-cv-06567) District Judge: Honorable Gerald J. Pappert ____________________________________ Submitted Pursuant to Third Circuit LAR 34.1(a) April 10, 2026 Before: MATEY, MONTGOMERY-REEVES, and NYGAARD, Circuit Judges (Opinion filed ) ___________ OPINION* ___________ * This disposition is not an opinion of the full Court and pursuant to I.O.P. 5.7 does not constitute binding precedent. PER CURIAM Pro se appellant Jerry J. Painadath appeals from the District Court’s dismissal of his second amended complaint, which raised claims related to his former employment at Jefferson Einstein Hospital. For the reasons that follow, we will affirm the District Court’s judgment. I. In 2024, Painadath initiated a federal lawsuit against Thomas Jefferson University Hospital and Jefferson Einstein Hospital. After granting him leave to proceed in forma pauperis, the District Court screened his complaint pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2) and dismissed it for failure to state a claim, granting him leave to amend. Painadath’s first amended complaint was dismissed on the same basis, and his second amended complaint included the following allegations.1 Painadath began working as a registered nurse at Jefferson Einstein in June 2023. In October 2023, he was doing rounds and saw a patient experiencing signs of an emergency medical condition, which he reported to his nurse manager and the attending doctor. When Painadath reviewed the patient’s chart, it said that the patient had been seen in the ER, where doctors recommended that the patient be transferred to the intensive care unit for stabilization, which was not where Painadath worked. Painadath 1 Because we write primarily for the parties, we will recite only the allegations necessary for this discussion. 2 shared this information with his nurse manager, the attending doctor, and the medical director, and when the patient started deteriorating, Painadath spoke with the medical director to transfer the patient to the ER for further examination. When the hospital transport team began the transfer process, Painadath’s nurse manager came to the door, stood in the doorway, and yelled at Painadath that the patient should not go to the ER and that she would “teach [him] a lesson” if he sent the patient there. Second Am. Compl. at ECF p. 6. In November 2023, after a different incident, Painadath was suspended without pay. While he was suspended, Painadath claims that an administrator called him and offered to “help elevate” his career if Painadath gave up a lawsuit that he had filed against a different former employer. Id. at ECF p. 7-8. Painadath’s employment at Jefferson Einstein was terminated on December 1, 2023. Painadath brought two claims in his operative complaint, seeking relief under the Emergency Medical Treatme