A recent legal filing claims that an employee was terminated after seeking workplace accommodations for his diabetes, raising questions about employer responsibilities under disability laws. The complaint was filed by Eric Matos in the United States District Court for the Eastern District of New York on June 4, 2026, naming Luminator Technology Group, Inc. as the defendant.
According to the court documents, Matos began working as a full-time Field Service Technician for Luminator Technology Group in February 2025. His duties included repairing surveillance and camera equipment within private and public mass transit bus systems. Matos states that shortly after starting his employment, he disclosed to his supervisor that he had Type II diabetes and required regular insulin shots throughout the day to manage his condition.
The complaint outlines that after this disclosure, Matos requested approval from his supervisor to attend necessary medical appointments during work hours. He also sought permission to take telehealth appointments in private and have flexible breaks related to managing his diabetes. Matos reports that while initially told he could use personal days or paid time off (PTO) for these needs if proper notice was given, he later faced increasing scrutiny regarding attendance and break policies.
The filing alleges that project managers emphasized skipping lunch or breaks due to project deadlines, which conflicted with Matos’s need to eat intermittently and self-administer insulin. When attempting to use lunch breaks for telehealth appointments with his endocrinologist, Matos says he was instructed by his supervisor to submit all requests through the company’s timekeeping system regardless of whether PTO was used.
In April 2025, Matos began discussions with Human Resources about applying for medical leave and reasonable accommodations. He provided documentation from his doctor supporting these requests but claims he was placed on unpaid leave pending further paperwork. Despite submitting a doctor’s note by May 1, 2025—as requested—Matos alleges he was terminated the following day due to what the company described as a “deficient” medical note.
The complaint asserts violations of both the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) and the New York State Human Rights Law (NYSHRL). It alleges discrimination based on disability, failure to provide reasonable accommodations as required by law, retaliation following accommodation requests, and wrongful termination. The filing states: “Defendant failed to engage in a good-faith interactive process and failed to provide Plaintiff with a reasonable accommodation.”
Matos is seeking several forms of relief from the court: a declaration that Luminator engaged in unlawful employment practices; compensation for lost wages and benefits; compensatory damages for emotional distress; punitive damages; attorneys’ fees; costs; and any further relief deemed just by the court.
The case is being handled by Joshua M. Friedman of Phillips & Associates Attorneys at Law PLLC on behalf of Eric Matos. The case number is 2:26-cv-03355.
Source: 226cv03355_Matos_v_Luminator_Technology_Group_Inc_Complaint_Eastern_District_New_York.pdf