MEMORANDUM-DECISION AND ORDERI. INTRODUCTION Plaintiff pro se Douglas J. Johnson brings this action against Defendants AmeriGas Propane, L.P. (“AmeriGas”) and Kathy L. Prigmore under the anti-retaliation provisions of the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act, 15 U.S.C. §78u-6 (“Dodd-Frank”), and Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, 18 U.S.C. §1514A (“Sarbanes-Oxley”). (Dkt. No. 20). Plaintiff alleges that Defendants terminated his employment in retaliation for his complaint that AmeriGas was violating securities laws through unlawful pricing practices. (Id.). Presently before the Court are Defendants’: (1) motion for summary judgment under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 56 on the ground that Plaintiffs’ claims are barred by the Agreement and General Release he signed after he was terminated and (2) supplemental motion for summary judgment on the ground that Plaintiff is not a “whistleblower” within the meaning of the Dodd-Frank anti-retaliation provision, as discussed in Digital Realty Trust, Inc. v. Somers, 138 S. Ct. 767, 772-73 (2018), which was decided after Defendants filed their initial motion for summary judgment. (Dkt. Nos 24, 32). Plaintiff opposes Defendants’ motions. (Dkt. Nos. 27, 31, 34). For the following reasons, Defendants’ supplemental motion for summary judgment is granted.1II. FACTS2AmeriGas is propane distribution company that sells propane to residential and commercial customers. (Dkt. No. 24-2,2; Dkt. No. 27,6). Plaintiff began his employment with AmeriGas in 1986, and was a market manager in AmeriGas’ northeast region from 1995 until his termination on March 3, 2011. (Dkt. No. 24-2,
4, 7). Defendant Prigmore was Plaintiff’s supervisor at the time he was terminated. (Id.3; Dkt. No. 27-17, at 6).One of the ways AmeriGas prices its products is “cost plus margin contracts.” (Dkt. No. 27,7). “In the winter of 2005-2006,” Plaintiff recorded a conference call during which John Sette, the Vice President of AmeriGas Northeast Region, “talked about how AmeriGas added to their index cost of gas after telling [the] sales staff to convince…contract customers to allow [AmeriGas] to put their contracts on [its] index cost and take advantage of [its] buying power and trust…that they would be advantaged.” (Id.8). During the call, Sette stated that “AmeriGas didn’t think [this practice] was right as the customer did not know the true cost” and that he would “look into this issue.” (Id.9).In May 2006, Plaintiff “was falsely accused of making racial comments after a meeting and during a dinner” with AmeriGas employees. (Id.12). Plaintiff, who did not receive an opportunity to address the allegations, was “outraged…and responded by using the words Sarbanes Oxley, referencing John Sette’s statements about AmeriGas adding to [its] cost of propane.”3 (Id.
