A recent legal filing claims that an employee was terminated as part of a company reorganization in a manner that discriminated on the basis of age, raising concerns about compliance with state human rights laws and federal protections for older workers. The complaint was filed by Robert Monaco in the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York on March 17, 2026, naming Check Point Software Technologies, Inc. as the defendant.
According to the complaint, Monaco worked for Check Point Software Technologies for approximately seven and a half years as a Channel Security Engineer before being terminated on January 22, 2026. At the time of his termination, Monaco was 63 years old. The lawsuit alleges that his dismissal was part of a broader company reorganization announced by Check Point executives during a company-wide videoconference on January 21, 2026.
The filing outlines Monaco’s employment history with Check Point, beginning in June 2018. His primary duties involved working with industry partners to facilitate sales of Check Point’s software products. He reported directly to Bill Ready, Sales Engineering Manager for the East Coast, who is described as being in his late 30s or early 40s. Other managers and engineers referenced in the complaint include Tony Sabaj (Head of Channel Security Engineering for the Americas), Alex Ng (responsible for New England territory), and Doug Schumaker (Western US Channel Sales Engineering Manager).
Monaco claims that he was one of several Channel Security Engineers laid off during this period, all of whom were over age 50 at the time of their termination. The complaint states: “All four of these laid off Engineers were over 50 years of age at the time of their termination. By contrast, all of the Channel Engineers who Plaintiff knows were retained by Check Point following the layoffs are in their 30s or 40s.”
The lawsuit further alleges that prior to his termination, Monaco was asked by Ready if he had considered retirement due to his age: “Since you’re getting older, have you given any thought to when you might retire?” Monaco responded that he intended to continue working for the foreseeable future.
After being informed that his position would be eliminated due to nationwide reorganization and that his territory would be merged with another region covered by Alex Ng (who is about fifteen years younger), Monaco asserts he was offered interviews for lower-level positions within Check Point but was not selected or provided feedback regarding those interviews.
The complaint points out performance metrics from December 2025 showing Monaco had higher target attainment scores than Ng: “Plaintiff’s target attainment score was 86% to target, while Mr. Ng’s was only 76% to target… Plaintiff’s ARR [annual recurring revenue] was only -3%. Despite having objectively worse performance metrics, Check Point nonetheless chose to retain Mr. Ng (who is some 15 years Plaintiff’s junior) while terminating Plaintiff.”
Monaco also alleges that older managers were negatively affected during reorganization efforts. For example, managerial responsibilities previously held by Doug Schumaker (over age 60) were transferred to Bill Ready while Schumaker was demoted.
The lawsuit claims that Check Point did not provide legally required information under the Older Workers Benefit Protection Act when offering severance agreements containing waivers related to federal age discrimination claims: “Check Point did not provide Plaintiff with… OWBPA-required information.” This information includes details about individuals covered by layoffs and ages of employees affected or retained.
Monaco seeks compensatory damages including back pay and front pay, emotional distress damages, liquidated damages, punitive damages where applicable under law, penalties available under relevant statutes, costs including expert fees and attorneys’ fees, pre-judgment and post-judgment interest as provided by law, and any other relief deemed necessary by the court.
Attorneys D. Maimon Kirschenbaum and Lucas C. Buzzard from Joseph & Kirschenbaum LLP represent Robert Monaco in this case under case number 7:26-cv-2205.
Source: 726cv02205_Robert_Monaco_v_Check_Point_Complaint_Southern_District_of_New_York..pdf
