HOUSTON, TX – September 9 2025 — A whistleblower case involving Bayport Laboratories, LLC and its CEO, Yaumara Camacho, has erupted into a legal and public scandal with broad implications for consumer safety, workers’ rights, and judicial integrity in Harris County.

The case, Bayport Laboratories, LLC and Yaumara Camacho v. Milagros Garcia et. al (Cause No. 2025-41725, 151st Judicial District Court), pits a Houston-based cosmetics manufacturer for prestige brands sold in luxury retailers, against a nearly 60-year-old disabled worker who reported serious health and safety violations to OSHA.

On June 6, 2025, Garcia filed a formal OSHA Section 11(c) whistleblower complaint, detailing unsafe practices including contamination with blood and glass, intoxicated management, employees defecating on the floor, and inadequate cleaning of machinery. OSHA confirmed her protected status on June 13, 2025.

Days later, Bayport sued Garcia and her daughter for more than $5 million, claiming one email caused catastrophic losses. Using that allegation, the company secured a Temporary Injunction from Judge Christine Weems, sitting for the 151st District Court. The injunction prohibits the Garcias from speaking publicly, reporting to agencies, or even issuing press releases — restrictions legal observers call unconstitutional.
“This isn’t just a gag order; it’s a weapon against whistleblowers,” said a Houston-based labor rights attorney. “It tells every worker: if you speak up, we’ll bankrupt you and threaten you with jail.”

Behind Bayport’s polished branding, insiders describe an alarming environment:

“I tripped over tangled wires and ended up needing four knee surgeries,” said one former worker.

“My hair is falling out from the stress. I had to see a psychiatrist because of what that place did to me,” shared another.

“We had a male manager come in drunk. Everyone knew it, even the owners,” claimed a staff member.

“They timed us in the bathroom. If you took too long, you were written up,” said a current employee still fearful of retaliation.

A source close to the case added: “Bayport wants the public to think this is about one email. But customers were already raising concerns about contamination before Milagros ever spoke up. The $5 million claim is smoke and mirrors.”

Court proceedings have fueled public distrust:

Motions to dissolve or narrow the injunction were denied. Requests for findings of fact were rejected. ADA accommodation requests were mocked by court staff, according to recorded calls. There is an investigation into ex parte contact by a former clerk and the attorneys, Deans- Stepp Law out of Dallas have stated the defendants are harrassing and threatening the entire Harris County District Clerk which necessitates a venue change.

The contradictions don’t end in the courtroom. Bayport recently issued a press release celebrating its expansion into Miami, boasting of growth and new business opportunities — directly undermining its claims of irreparable harm.

“You can’t tell a judge you’re ruined in Houston while telling investors you’re thriving in Miami,” said one source familiar with the filings. “It’s a corporate two-face routine — one for the court, one for the public.”

“This is not only about one whistleblower,” said a spokesperson for Madeupinhouston LLC. “It’s about whether Harris County courts will allow a private company and its lawyers to silence federally protected speech. Consumers deserve to know if their beauty products are contaminated, and workers deserve protection when they speak out.”

Trial is set for June 2, 2026. In the meantime, Garcia, without health insurance, continues to face contempt threats and financial hardship as Bayport withholds pay, PTO, and benefits.