JUDGE ANDERSEN

FOINRTTHHEEUNNOIRTETDHESRTNATDEISSTDRIISCTTROICFTILCLOIUNRO~~ASITRA~J’EUDGE KEYS

EASTERN DIVISION 0~U

EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY

7282

COMMISSION,

)

CIVIL ACTIO~ NO.

)

P "ti ’o0 ,gF.TE0

) ) COMPLAINT

v.

tl0V 1 0 7_604 )

Sears, Roebuck & Company Defendant

) ) JURY TRIAL DE~

NATURE OF THE ACTION
This is an action under Tide I of the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990 and Title I of the Civil Rights Act of 1991 to correct unlawful employment practices. The Equal Employment Opportunity Commission ("EEOC") alleges that Sears Roebuck & Company terminated the employment of John Bava on account of his disability rather than accommodating him by extending his leave or returning him to work in an available position which he could have pe~:formed, and, further, discriminated against a class of individuals (including but not liraited to John Bava) with disabilities by maintaining an inflexible one year leave policy which did not provide for reasonable accommodation and which instead provided for termination of employment, all in violation of the ADA.

.IURISDICTION AND VENUE

1. Jurisdiction of thk Court is invoked pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § § 451, 1331, 1337, 1343 and 1345. This action is authorized and instituted pursuant to Section 107(a) of the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990 ("ADA"), 42 U.S.C. § 12117(a), which

Page 1 of 6
/

incorporates by reference Section 706 and Section 707 of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 ("Title VII"), 42 U.S.C. § 2000e-5, and § 20000e-7.
2. The employment p:ractices alleged to be unlawful were committed within the State of Illinois and elsewhere where Sears does business in the United States.
PARTIES
3. Plaintiff EEOC is the agency of the United States of America charged with the administration, interpretation and enforcement of Title I of the ADA and is expressly authorized to bring this action by Section 107(a) of the ADA, 42 U.S.C. § 12117(a), which incorporates by reference Section 706(0(1) and (3), 42 U.S.C. § 2000e-5(0(1) and
(3).
4. At all relevant times, Sears, Roebuck & Comapny ("Sears") was doing business in the State of Illinois and had at least 15 employees.
5. At all relevant times, Sears was an employer engaged in an industry affecting commerce under Section 101(5) of the ADA, 42 U.S.C.§ 12111(5), and Section 101(7) of the ADA, 42 U.S.C. !i 12111(7), which incorporates by reference Sections 701(g) and Ca) of Title VII, 42 U.S.C. §§ 2000e(g) and Ca).
6. At all relevant times, Sears was a covered entity under Section 101(2) of the ADA, 42 U.S.C. § 12111(2).
S’rATEMENT OF CLAIMS
7. More than thirty days prior to the institution of this lawsuit, John Bava filed a Charge of Discrimination with the EEOC alleging violations of Title I of the ADA by Sears. All conditions precedent to the institution of this lawsuit have been fulfilled.
Page 2 of 6

8. In 2001 and 2002 Sears terminated the employment of John Bava, an employee with disabilities, rather than accommodating him by extending his leave or by returning him to work in aa available position which he could have performed in violation of Sections 102(a,) andl02(b)(3)(a) and (19)(5) and of Title I of the ADA, 42 U.S.C. §§ 12112(a) and 12112(b)(3)(A) and (b)(5).
9. The effect of the practices complained of in paragraph. 8 above has been to deprive John Bava of equal employment opportunities and otherwise adversely affect his status as as an employee bezause of his disabilities.
10. The tmlawful employment practices complained of in paragraph 8 above were intentional.
11. The unlawful employment practices complained of in paragraph 8 above were done with malice or with reckless indifference to the federally protected fights of John Bava.
12. Since at least 2002, Sears has maintained an inflexible worker’s compensation one year leave policy which does not provide for reasonable accommodation of employees with disabilities and which instead provides for termination of their employment, in violation of Sections 102(a) andl02(b)(3)(A) and (b)(5) of Title I of the ADA, 42 U.S.C. §§ 12112(a) and 12112(b)(3)(A) and (b)(5).
13. The effect of the practices complained of in paragraph 12 above has been to deprive a class of disabled employees of equal employment opporttmifies and otherwise adversely affect their status as employees because of their disabilities.
13. The unlawful employment practices complained of in paragraph 12 above were intentional.
14. The unlawful employment practices complained of in paragraph 12 above were done with malice or with leckless indifference to the federally protected fights of a class of disabled employees.
Page 3 of 6

PRAYER FOR RELIEF
Wherefore, the Commission respectfully requests that this Court: A. Grant a permanent injunction enjoining Sears, its officers, successors, ssigns, and all persons in active: concert or participation with it from engaging in employment practices which discriminate on the basis of disability. B. Order Sears to in:~titute and carry out policies, practices, and programs which provide equal employment opporttmities for qualified individuals with disabilities, and which eradicate the effects of the unlawful employment practices of Sears. C. Order Defendant to make whole John Bava by providing appropriate back pay with pre-judgmeinntt’erie:st, in amounts to be determined at trial, and other affirmative
-I
relief necessary to eradicate the effects of its unlawful employment practices; D. Order Defendant to make whole John Bava by providing compensation for
past and future pecuniary losse,,l resulting from his unlawful termination, including, but not limited to, job search expenses;
E. Order Sear~to mz&:e whole John Bava by providing compensation for nonpecuniary losses resulting fiom the unlawful practices complained of in paragraph 8 above, including emotional part, suffering, inconvenience, loss of enjoyment of life, and humiliation, in amounts to be determined at trial.
F. Order Sears to pay John Bava punitive damages for its malicious and reckless conduct, as described ~a paragraph 8 above, in an amount to be determined at
G. Order Defendant to make whole a class of disabled individuals by providing them appropriate back pay wi~ pre-judgment interest, in amounts to be determined at
Page ~ of 6

trial, and other affirmative re.tiefnecessary to eradicate the effects of its unlawful employment practices;
H. Order Defendant Io make whole a class of disabled individuals by providing them compensation for past and future pecuniary losses resulting from his unlawful termination, including, but not limited to, job search expenses;
I. Order Sears to make whole a class of disabled individuals by providing compensation for nonpecuni~ry losses resulting from the unlawful practices complained of in paragraph 12 above, including emotional pain, suffering, inconvenience, loss of enjoyment of life, and humiliation, in mounts to be determined at trial.
J. Order Sears to pay a class of disabled individuals punitive damages for its malicious and reckless conduct, as described in paragraph 12 above, in an amount to be determined at trial.
K. Grant such further relief as the Court deems necessary and proper in the public interest.
L. Award the Commission its costs of this action.
JURY TRIAL DEMAND
The Commission requests a jury trim on all questions of fact raised by its complaint.
Page 5 of 6

ERIC DREH~AND General Counsel

JAMES LEE Deputy General Counsel
GWENDOLYN YOUNG REAMS Associate General Counsel

Equal En~loyment Opportunity Commission

1800 L/~)~ree~N.W..

~

C

Trial Attorney
Aaron DeCamp Trial Attorney
Ethan M. M. Cohen Equal Employment Opportunity Commission Chicago District Office 500 West Madison Street, Sui~te 500 Chicago, Illinois 60661 (312) 353-756S
Page 6 of 6

Civil Cover Sheet

~

-

Page 1 of 1

t~ZT_ F.D S’rXT~ __~. Tin_ CT COURT NOR’I~STRICT OF ILL~OI~AGISTRATE JUDGE KEYS

Civil Cover Sheet ---0

i 4 C ~ 2 8 2

This automated JS-44 conforms generally to the rr anual JS-44 approved bythe 1udicial Conference oiler t~United States in September 1974. The data is required for the use of the Clerk of Court for the purpose of initiating the civil docket sheet. The information contained herein neither replaces nor supplements the filing md service of pleadings or other papers as required by law. This form is authorized for use ~ in the Northern Dislrict of Illinois.

Plaintiff(s): United States Equal Employ~zent Opportunity Commission

County of Residence:

Plaintiff’s Arty:

Aaron R. DeCamp EEOC
500 W. Madison, Suite 2800 312-353-7582

Defendant(s):Sears, Roebuck & Con~paay
County of Residence: Cook Defendant’s Atty:

II. Basis of Jurisdiction:

1. U.S. Gov’t Plaintiff

III. Citizenship of Principal Parties (Diversity Cases Only)
Plaintiff:-.N/A Defendant:- N/A
I. Original Proceeding

DOCKETED
NOV 1 0 2004

V. Nature of Suit:

442 Em ploymeat

vi.Cause of Action:

Section 107(a) of the ADA, 42 U.S.C. See. 12101 et see. EEOC alleges that Sears

discriminated against a class of employees by terminating them at the end of a period of leave rather then accommodating them.

VII. Requested in Complaint

Class Action: No

Dollar Demand:

Jury Demand: Yes

VIII. This case ISNOT a rofiling ofa previot.sly dismissed case.

If any of Ibis info~ alion is incoff~, please go ba~ ~ ~e Ci~l C~er S~ ~t fo~ ~g ~e ~ bu~ ~ y~ b~ ~ ~ it. ~ ~

print ~is fo~. ~ ~d ~ it ~d ~bmit it ~ yo~ ~ civil ~ti~. Note: You may need to adjust the font s~ in your browser

display to make the form print properly,

a~: ~

http://www.ilnd.useourts.gov/PUBLIC/Forms/auto_js44.cfm

11/10/2004

STATES DISTRICT C(~T NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS In the Matter of Equal Employment Opporvmity Commission ("EEOC") v. Sears Roebuck & Co.
JUDGE ANDERSEN JUDGE KEYS
APPEARANCES ARE I"IERF.,BY FILED BY THE UNDERSIGNED AS ATTORN’EY(S) ~I~R: Plaintiff, EEOC

ross 500 W. Madison, Suite 2800
Chicago, ]L 60661 Nvm~ (312) 353-8551 ~z~’m~TtoSrr~u~sr~rr~4os~v~) A~R.D.C. No. 1187583

EEOC s’rrt~t~,s 500 W. Madison, Suite 2800 cm’~,T~Z~ Chicago, IL 60661 a-am~omr~,~m~ (312) 886-9124
~Yr~r~T~ra~s~n~’°~’~’~A.R.D.C. No. 06210804

DESIGNATED A~ LOP-M. COU~ISEL?

(C)

_ ~

(D)

SIGNATURE

N~ Ethan M. M. Cohen
EEOC sam~r~vr~s 500 W. Madison, Suite 2800
~~ ~cago, ~ ~661 ~o~= (312) 353-7568 ~o~=~ONU~ A.R.D.C. No. 06206781

Aaron DeCamp n~ EEOC srm~,,~ss 500 W. M~ S&m 28~
~~ ~c~o, ~ ~661 ~o~ (312) 353-8561
~°~ts~°N~A.R.D.C. No. 06282725

 
 Order FOllll (0112005)

United States District Court, Northern District of Illinois

Name of Assigned Judge or Magistrate Judge
CASE NUMBER
CASE TITLE

Wayne R. Andersen 04 C 7282

Sitting Judge if Other than Assigned Judge
DATE

504 ~/) Job:;

J

I

EEOC v. Sears, Roebuck and Co.

DOCKET ENTRY TEXT:
The Court denies defendant's motion to dismiss (# 4-1). Defendant's motion for a suggested briefing schedule (# 4-2) was granted. See Minute Order of January 20,2005.

• [ For further details see text below.]

Docketing to mail notices .

STATEMENT

Before the Court is defendant's motion to dismiss pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure

12(b)(6). For the following reasons, the motion to dismiss is denied.

On November 10, 2004, the plaintiff, Equal Employment Opportunity Commission ("EEOC"), filed

its complaint in this Court alleging that the defendant, Sears, Roebuck and Company ("Sears"), discriminated

against John Bava and a class of disabled employees by failing to accommodate their disabilities, in violation

of the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990 ("ADA"), 42 U.S.C. § 12117(a), and Title I of the Civil

Rights Act of 1991,42 U.S.C. § 1981(a). The EEOC alleges that Sears discharged Bava, "an employee with

disabilities, rather than accommodating him by extending his leave or by returning him to work in an

available position which he could have performed." (Compl. '11 8.) The EEOC further alleges that Sears

discriminated against a class of disabled employees by unlawfully maintaining an inflexible worker's

compensation leave policy, which provides for discharge of employment after a year instead of "reasonable

accommodation of employees with disabilities." (Id. '1112.)

In its motion to dismiss, Sears argues that the complaint fails to allege the essential elements of an

ADA claim. It argues that the EEOC has failed to allege that any member of the class on whose behalf it

brings this action suffered from a disability as its defined in the ADA or could perform the essential functions

of the job. In particular, Sears argues the complaint does not reveal the nature or scope ofBava's alleged

disabilities, nor does it allege that his disabilities fall within the scope of the ADA or substantially limit one

or more of his major life activities. Sears further contends that its description of the putative class members

as "employees with disabilities" is not enough to the invoke the protections of the ADA.

In ruling on a motion to dismiss, the Court must construe the allegations of a compJaint in the light

most favorable to the plaintiff. Rueth v. United States Environmental Protection Agency, 13 F.3d 227, 229

(7th Cir. 1993). A court will grant a motion to dismiss only ifit is impossible for the plaintiff to prevail
under any set of facts that could be proven consistent with the allegations. Forseth v. Village ofSuss'jx, 199

F.3d 363, 368 (7th Cir. 2000).

-(jJL<

04 C 7282 EEOC v. Sears, Roebuck and Co.

/ Page 1 of 2

STATEMENT
The Federal Rules require only notice pleading. Fed. R. Civ. P. 8(a). Rule 8(a) requires a pleading to set forth "(I) a short plain statement of the grounds upon which the court's jurisdiction depends . . . (2) a short and plain statement of the claim showing that the pleader is entitled to relief, and (3) a demand for the relief the pleader seeks." /d. Except in a few circumstances, the Federal Rules only require that a defendant is given notice of a plaintiff's claims and do not require the plaintiff to plead detailed facts in support of its claims. "[T]here is no requirement in federal suits of pleading the facts or the elements of a claim ...." Walker v. Thomson, 288 F.3d 1005, 1007 (7th Cir. 2002). The Supreme Court has rejected a heightened pleading requirement in employment discrimination cases, noting that a "heightened pleading standard in employment discrimination cases conflicts with Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 8(a)(2) ...." Swierkiewicz v. Sorema NA., 534 U.S. 506, 512 (2002).
After carefully reviewing plaintiff's complaint, and in light of the above standards, we believe the EEOC has alleged a valid ADA claim. The complaint conforms with the requirements of Rule 8(a) by providing a short and plain statement of its claims. The complaint alleges that Bava has "disabilities" and alleges that Sears failed to accommodate his disabilities by returning him to a "position which he could have performed ...." (Compl. '1\8.) The allegations place Sears on notice that the EEOC considers Bava qualified to perform the essential functions of the job, with or without reasonable accommodation. The complaint also alleges Bava was discharged, which constitutes an adverse employment action. Stockett v. Muncie Ind. Transit Sys., 221 F.3d 997,1001 (7th Cir. 2000). Even if the EEOC were required to plead a prima facie case of disability discrimination, we believe these alleged facts would survive a 12(b)(6) motion.
As for the class allegations, the complaint alleges that Sears "maintained an inflexible worker's compensation one year leave policy which does not provide for reasonable accommodation of employees with disabilities." (Compl. '1\12.) We find that the issue of whether defendant's leave policy fails to accommodate its disabled employees is an issue upon which defendants have been given notice and is a claim for which the plaintiffs are entitled to discovery.
For the foregoing reasons, defendant's motion to dismiss (# 4-1) is denied. This case is referred to the magistrate judge for discovery. It is so ordered.
7 Wayne R. Anders~
United States District Judge

04 C 7282 EEOC v. Sears, Roebuck and Co.

Page 2 of 2

 
 Case: 1:04-cv-7282 As of: 06/04/2017 06:12 PM CDT 1 of 12
COX,PROTO,TERMED
United States District Court Northern District of Illinois − CM/ECF LIVE, Ver 6.1.1.2 (Chicago)
CIVIL DOCKET FOR CASE #: 1:04−cv−07282

EEOC v. Sears Roebuck & Co Assigned to: Honorable Wayne R. Andersen Demand: $0 Cause: 42:12101 Americans with Disabilities Act
Plaintiff

Date Filed: 11/10/2004 Date Terminated: 09/29/2009 Jury Demand: Both Nature of Suit: 442 Civil Rights: Jobs Jurisdiction: U.S. Government Plaintiff

Equal Employment Opportunity Commission

represented by Aaron R. DeCamp Equal Employment Opportunity Commission 500 W. Madison Street 2000 Chicago, IL 60661 (312)353−7582 Email: aaron.decamp@eeoc.gov LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

John C. Hendrickson Equal Employment Opportunity Commission 500 West Madison Street Suite 2000 Chicago, IL 60661 (312) 869−8099 Email: john.hendrickson@eeoc.gov LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

Deborah Lois Hamilton Equal Employment Opportunity Commission 500 W. Madison Street 2000 Chicago, IL 60661 (312) 869−8110 Email: deborah.hamilton@eeoc.gov ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

Ethan M.M. Cohen United States Equal Employment Opportunity Commission 500 West Madison Street Suite 2000 Chicago, IL 60661 (312) 869−8104 Email: ethan.cohen@eeoc.gov ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

Gregory M. Gochanour United States Equal Employment Opportunity Commission 500 West Madison Street Suite 2000 Chicago, IL 60661 (312) 869−8100 Email: gregory.gochanour@eeoc.gov ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

Case: 1:04-cv-7282 As of: 06/04/2017 06:12 PM CDT 2 of 12

V. Defendant Sears Roebuck & Company

represented by Deborah A. Devaney Dentons US LLP 233 South Wacker Drive Suite 5900 Chicago, IL 60606 (312) 876−3435 Email: ddevaney@sonnenschein.com TERMINATED: 09/27/2007 LEAD ATTORNEY
Amy L. Bess Vedder Price P.C. 1401 I Street, NW Suite 1100 Washington, DC 20005 (202) 312−3320 Email: abess@vedderprice.com ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
Ariel J. Tesher Dentons US LLP 233 South Wacker Drive Suite 5900 Chicago, IL 60606 312 876 2813 Email: ariel.tesher@snrdenton.com ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
Christopher Qualley King Dentons US LLP 233 South Wacker Drive Suite 5900 Chicago, IL 60606 (312)876−8000 Email: christopher.king@dentons.com ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
Christopher A Wallace City of Chicago, Department of Law 30 N. LaSalle St. Suite 900 Chicago, IL 60602 (312) 742−6408 Email: Christopher.Wallace@fnf.com TERMINATED: 02/01/2007
Jeffrey S. Goldman Sonnenschein, Nath & Rosenthal, LLP 233 South Wacker Drive 8000 Sears Tower Chicago, IL 60606 (312)876−8000 Email: jgoldman@sonnenschein.com TERMINATED: 02/01/2007
Lisa Zachary Fain Dentons US LLP 233 South Wacker Drive Suite 5900 Chicago, IL 60606

Case: 1:04-cv-7282 As of: 06/04/2017 06:12 PM CDT 3 of 12
(312)876−8000 Email: lfain@sonnenschein.com ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
Mariam Abdullahi Farah Perkins Coie LLP 131 S. Dearborn St. Suite 1700 Chicago, IL 60603 (312) 876−8000 Email: mariam.farah@dentons.com ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
Saira Janine Alikhan 3516 W. Fullerton Avenue Suite 1 Chicago, IL 60647 (312) 371−4993 Email: salikhan@sjalawgroup.com ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
Samuel Phillip Linsenmaier Dentons US LLP 233 South Wacker Drive Suite 5900 Chicago, IL 60606 (312) 876−2848 Email: slinsenmaie@sonnenschein.com ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
Terance A Gonsalves Steptoe and Johnson LLP 115 S LaSalle St, Chicago, IL 60603 Suite 3100 Chicago, IL 60603 312 577−1275 Email: tgonsalves@steptoe.com ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
Tobias Edward Schlueter Ogletree, Deakins, Nash, Smoak & Stewart, P.C. 155 N. Wacker Drive Suite 4300 Chicago, IL 60606 (312)558−1220 Email: tobias.schlueter@ogletreedeakins.com ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

Date Filed 11/10/2004
01/03/2005 01/10/2005 01/10/2005 01/20/2005

# Docket Text
1 COMPLAINT; jury demand − Civil cover sheet − Appearance(s) of Ethan M.M. Cohen, Gregory M. Gochanour, John C. Hendrickson as attorney(s) for plaintiff ( no summons(es) issued.) ( Documents: 1−1 through 1−3) (cdy) (Entered: 11/10/2004)
2 ATTORNEY APPEARANCE for defendant by Deborah A. Devaney, Jeffrey S. Goldman, Lisa Zachary Fain (cdy) (Entered: 01/04/2005)
3 DEMAND for jury trial by defendant (cdy) (Entered: 01/11/2005)
4 MOTION by defendant to dismiss the complaint and suggested briefing schedule ; Memorandum in support ; Notice (las) Modified on 01/11/2005 (Entered: 01/11/2005)
5 MINUTE entry before Judge Wayne R. Andersen : Set deadlines/hearing as to motion to dismiss, motion by filer to set a briefing schedule 4 : Responses due by 2/18/2005

Case: 1:04-cv-7282 As of: 06/04/2017 06:12 PM CDT 4 of 12

02/18/2005 03/04/2005 07/22/2005
08/11/2005 06/30/2006 06/30/2006 07/05/2006 07/06/2006 07/10/2006 07/12/2006 07/13/2006 07/17/2006
07/19/2006
07/21/2006 09/06/2006 11/08/2006 01/08/2007

Replies due by 3/4/2005. Ruling will be made by mail. Mailed notice. (tsa, ) (Entered: 01/20/2005)
6 RESPONSE by plaintiff EEOC to defendant's Rule 12(b)(6) motion to dismiss 4 .(lcw, Lakisha) (Entered: 02/23/2005)
7 REPLY MEMORANDUM OF LAW by defendant Sears Roebuck & Company of its motion to dismiss the complaint 4 ; Exhibits. (cdy, ) Modified on 7/26/2006 (ym, ). (Entered: 03/08/2005)
8 MINUTE entry before Judge Wayne R. Andersen : The Court denies defendant's motion to dismiss 4 . Defendant's motion for a suggested briefing schedule 4 was granted. See Minute Order of January 20, 2005. Mailed notice (cdy, ) (Entered: 07/28/2005)
9 ANSWER to Complaint and Defenses by Sears Roebuck & Company(Devaney, Deborah) (Entered: 08/11/2005)
10 MOTION by Plaintiff Equal Employment Opportunity Commission for hearing to schedule initial status (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit 1# 2 Exhibit 2# 3 Exhibit 3# 4 Exhibit 4# 5 Exhibit 5)(Cohen, Ethan) (Entered: 06/30/2006)
11 NOTICE of Motion by Ethan M.M. Cohen for presentment of motion for hearing 10 before Honorable Arlander Keys on 7/17/2006 at 09:30 AM. (Cohen, Ethan) (Entered: 06/30/2006)
12 MOTION by Plaintiff Equal Employment Opportunity Commission for hearing re MOTION by Plaintiff Equal Employment Opportunity Commission for hearing to schedule initial status 10 (Cohen, Ethan) (Entered: 07/05/2006)
13 ATTORNEY Appearance for Plaintiff Equal Employment Opportunity Commission by Aaron R. DeCamp (DeCamp, Aaron) (Entered: 07/06/2006)
14 EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE ORDER:Case referred to Magistrate Judge Arlander Keys for all discovery motions and discovery supervision. Signed by Judge Executive Committee on 7/10/06. (mjc, ) (Entered: 07/12/2006)
15 MINUTE entry before Judge Arlander Keys : Status hearing set for 7/19/2006 at 09:00 AM. in courtroom 2230. (ac, ) (Entered: 07/12/2006)
16 MINUTE entry before Judge Arlander Keys : Plaintiff's motion for hearing is entered and continued to 7/19/2006 at 09:00 AM. in room 2230 10 , 12 . (ac, ) (Entered: 07/13/2006)
17 RESPONSE by Sears Roebuck & Company to MOTION by Plaintiff Equal Employment Opportunity Commission for hearing re MOTION by Plaintiff Equal Employment Opportunity Commission for hearing to schedule initial status 10 12 (Devaney, Deborah) (Entered: 07/17/2006)
18 MINUTE entry before Judge Arlander Keys : Plaintiff Equal Employment Opportunity Commission's motion for hearing to schedule initial status is granted 10 . Status hearing held; continued to 9/6/06 at 9:00 a.m. The parties are to enter into an agreed proposed scheduling order and submit it to the Court prior to the next scheduled status hearing. Mailed notice (mjc, ) (Entered: 07/21/2006)
19 ATTORNEY Appearance for Defendant Sears Roebuck & Company by Christopher A Wallace (Wallace, Christopher) (Entered: 07/21/2006)
20 MINUTE entry before Judge Arlander Keys : Status hearing held; continued to 11/8/2006 at 9:00 a.m. Mailed notice (mjc, ) Modified on 9/18/2006 (ac, ). (Entered: 09/08/2006)
21 MINUTE entry before Judge Arlander Keys : Status hearing held; continued to 1/10/07 at 9:00 a.m. Discovery is proceeding. Mailed notices (gcy, ) (Entered: 11/13/2006)
24 NOTICE by Christopher A Wallace attorney for the defendant of Change of Address. (gcy, ) (Entered: 01/17/2007)

Case: 1:04-cv-7282 As of: 06/04/2017 06:12 PM CDT 5 of 12

01/09/2007 01/10/2007 01/26/2007 01/26/2007 02/01/2007 03/12/2007 04/27/2007 05/17/2007
07/27/2007 08/08/2007 08/27/2007 08/30/2007
09/10/2007 09/12/2007 09/19/2007

22 MINUTE entry before Judge Wayne R. Andersen :Plaintiff's motion for hearing 12 to schedule a status conference is granted by 18 .Mailed notice (tsa, ) (Entered: 01/09/2007)
23 MINUTE entry before Judge Arlander Keys : Status hearing held; continued to 3/12/07 at 9:00 a.m. Discovery is proceeding. Mailed notices (gcy, ) (Entered: 01/12/2007)
25 MOTION by Defendant Sears Roebuck & CompanyLeave to Withdraw Certain Counsel of Record (Fain, Lisa) (Entered: 01/26/2007)
26 NOTICE of Motion by Lisa Zachary Fain for presentment of motion for miscellaneous relief 25 before Honorable Wayne R. Andersen on 2/1/2007 at 09:00 AM. (Fain, Lisa) (Entered: 01/26/2007)
27 MINUTE entry before Judge Wayne R. Andersen : Defendant's motion for leave to withdraw certain counsel of record 25 is granted. Jeffrey S. Goldman and Christopher A. Wallace are given leave to withdraw appearances. Mailed notices (gcy, ) (Entered: 02/06/2007)
28 MINUTE entry before Judge Arlander Keys : Status hearing held; continued to 4/27/07 at 9:00 a.m. Discovery is proceeding. Mailed notices (gcy, ) (Entered: 03/15/2007)
29 MINUTE entry before Judge Arlander Keys : Magistrate Judge status hearing held on 4/27/2007. At the request of the parties, Court will hold a case management planning meeting in chambers with all parties present on 5/17/07 at 9:00 a.m. Mailed notices (gcy, ) (Entered: 04/30/2007)
30 MINUTE entry before Judge Arlander Keys : Discovery planning meeting held in chambers with the parties. To date, the EEOC has conducted interviews with hundreds of potential class members pursuant to which it has determined that approximately 350 people should be included in the class. The Defendant and EEOC have agreed on the discovery requestes regarding 31 individuals. The Defendant will furnish relevant information to the EEOC regarding these 31 individuals and it is expected that most of the discovery regarding these 31 individuals (not including depositions) will be concluded by the end of September, 2007. Thereafter, the parties will be in a better position to estimate how long it will take to complete the discovery on the remaining individuals. Discovery regarding the Defendant's policy itself will also be on−going during this period. Status hearing set for 7/27/2007 at 09:00 AM.Mailed notices (gcy, ) (Entered: 05/21/2007)
31 MINUTE entry before Judge Arlander Keys :Status hearing set for 7/27/07 is reset to 8/8/2007 at 09:00 AM.(ac, ) (Entered: 08/03/2007)
32 MINUTE entry before Judge Arlander Keys :Magistrate Judge Status hearing held on 8/8/2007. The Parties appeared and informed the Court that discovery is proceeding. (ac, ) (Entered: 08/29/2007)
34 EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE ORDER:Case referred to magistrate judge Susan E. Cox. (See order for details). Signed by Judge Executive Committee on 8/27/07. Mailed notice (emd, ) (Entered: 08/31/2007)
33 MINUTE entry before Judge Susan E. Cox :Initial status hearing set for 9/12/07 at 9:45 a.m. in Courtroom 1342. The parties are directed to review and to comply with Judge Cox's Order Setting Initial Status Report for Cases Assigned to Judge Cox. Copies are available in chambers or through Judge Cox's web page at www.ilnd.uscourts.gov. Mailed notice (vkd, ) (Entered: 08/30/2007)
35 ATTORNEY Appearance for Defendant Sears Roebuck & Company by Christopher Qualley King (King, Christopher) (Entered: 09/10/2007)
36 MINUTE entry before Judge Susan E. Cox : Status hearing held; continued to 11/1/07 at 9:30 a.m. The parties are proceeding with informal class member discovery. Mailed notice (vkd, ) (Entered: 09/12/2007)
37 MOTION by counsel for Defendant Sears Roebuck & Company to withdraw as attorney Motion for Leave to Withdraw Certain Counsel of Record (Fain, Lisa) (Entered: 09/19/2007)

Case: 1:04-cv-7282 As of: 06/04/2017 06:12 PM CDT 6 of 12

09/19/2007 09/27/2007 10/15/2007 10/15/2007 10/18/2007 10/23/2007 11/01/2007
12/12/2007
12/12/2007 01/10/2008 01/10/2008 03/05/2008 03/14/2008 04/23/2008 04/23/2008 04/23/2008
06/02/2008

38 NOTICE of Motion by Lisa Zachary Fain for presentment of motion to withdraw as attorney 37 before Honorable Wayne R. Andersen on 9/27/2007 at 09:00 AM. (Fain, Lisa) (Entered: 09/19/2007)
39 MINUTE entry before Judge Wayne R. Andersen : Defendant Sears motion for leave to withdraw certain counsel of record 37 is granted. Deborah A. Devaney is given leave to withdraw her appearance. Mailed notices (gcy, ) (Entered: 10/01/2007)
40 MOTION by Defendant Sears Roebuck & Company for protective order Agreed Motion For Entry Of Protective Order (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit Exhibit A to Agreed Motion For Entry of Protective Order)(Fain, Lisa) (Entered: 10/15/2007)
41 NOTICE of Motion by Lisa Zachary Fain for presentment of motion for protective order 40 before Honorable Susan E. Cox on 10/18/2007 at 09:30 AM. (Fain, Lisa) (Entered: 10/15/2007)
42 MINUTE entry before Judge Susan E. Cox :Motion for protective order 40 is entered and continued. Hearing on motion for protective order 40 set for 11/1/07 at 9:30 a.m. Mailed notice (vkd, ) (Entered: 10/18/2007)
43 ATTORNEY Appearance for Defendant Sears Roebuck & Company by Lisa Zachary Fain Attorney appearance (Fain, Lisa) (Entered: 10/23/2007)
44 MINUTE entry before Judge Susan E. Cox : Status hearing held. Motion hearing held. Parties report on status of discovery. Defendant's motion for entry of Agreed Protective Order 40 is withdrawn. For the reasons stated in open court, the parties will submit revised Agreed Protective Order for the Court's approval. Status hearing set for 12/12/07 at 9:30 a.m. for a report of discovery efforts. Mailed notice (vkd, ) (Entered: 11/01/2007)
45 MINUTE entry before Judge Susan E. Cox :Magistrate Judge Status hearing held and continued to 3/10/2008 at 09:30 AM. The court adopts the parties proposed discovery schedule. (draft discovery schedule order to be submitted) Defendant's oral motion for entry of a protective order is granted.Advised in open court (jms, ) (Entered: 12/12/2007)
46 PROTECTIVE ORDER Signed by Judge Susan E. Cox on 12/12/2007:(gcy, ) (Entered: 12/17/2007)
47 MINUTE entry before Judge Susan E. Cox : Enter Order Regarding Discovery Plan. Fact discovery ordered closed by 12/31/2010. For further detail see separate order. Mailed notice by judge's staff. (srb,) (Entered: 01/11/2008)
48 ORDER REGARDING DISCOVERY PLAN Signed by Judge Susan E. Cox on 1/10/2008.(srb,) (Entered: 01/11/2008)
49 MINUTE entry before Judge Susan E. Cox : Pursuant to a telephonic request by the parties, status hearing set for 3/10/08 at 9:30 a.m. is stricken and reset to 3/14/08 at 9:30 a.m. Mailed notice (vkd, ) (Entered: 03/05/2008)
50 MINUTE entry before Judge Susan E. Cox :Status hearing held on 3/14/2008. Parties informed the Court regarding the parties plan to participate in mediation. Status hearing set for 4/23/08 at 9:30 a.m. Mailed notice (vkd, ) (Entered: 03/14/2008)
51 DOCKETED TO INCORRECT CASE. The pdf has been replaced. Modified on 4/24/2008 (vkd, ). (Entered: 04/23/2008)
52 NOTICE of correction regarding Document #51. Document docketed to incorrect case. (vkd, ) (Entered: 04/23/2008)
53 MINUTE entry before the Honorable Susan E. Cox: Status hearing held. Parties advised the Court they will participate in mediation while their discovery is continuing. Status hearing set for 7/9/08 at 9:30 a.m. Mailed notice (vkd, ) (Entered: 04/23/2008)
54 ATTORNEY Appearance for Defendant Sears Roebuck & Company by Ariel J. Tesher (Tesher, Ariel) (Entered: 06/02/2008)

Case: 1:04-cv-7282 As of: 06/04/2017 06:12 PM CDT 7 of 12

07/09/2008 07/16/2008 07/17/2008 09/15/2008 09/29/2008 09/29/2008 09/29/2008 09/29/2008 10/02/2008
10/10/2008 10/10/2008 10/15/2008 10/16/2008
10/17/2008

55 MINUTE entry before the Honorable Susan E. Cox: Status hearing held. Parties advised the Court of several unsuccessful mediations. Discovery is underway. Status hearing set for 9/15/08 at 9:30 a.m. Mailed notice (vkd, ) (Entered: 07/09/2008)
56 NOTICE by Ethan M.M. Cohen of Change of Address (Cohen, Ethan) (Entered: 07/16/2008)
57 ATTORNEY Appearance for Defendant Sears Roebuck & Company by Amy L. Bess (Bess, Amy) (Entered: 07/17/2008)
58 MINUTE entry before the Honorable Susan E. Cox: Status hearing held. The Court was advised of the status of discovery and that the parties are working diligently regarding the expected number of possible claimants. Status hearing set for 11/12/08 at 9:30 a.m. Mailed notice (vkd, ) (Entered: 09/16/2008)
59 MOTION by Plaintiff Equal Employment Opportunity Commission to compel Employee Contact Information (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit)(Hamilton, Deborah) (Entered: 09/29/2008)
60 NOTICE of Motion by Deborah Lois Hamilton for presentment of motion to compel 59 before Honorable Susan E. Cox on 10/2/2008 at 09:30 AM. (Hamilton, Deborah) (Entered: 09/29/2008)
61 MOTION by Plaintiff Equal Employment Opportunity Commission to compel (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit 1, # 2 Exhibit 2, # 3 Exhibit 3, # 4 Exhibit 4, # 5 Exhibit 5)(DeCamp, Aaron) (Entered: 09/29/2008)
62 NOTICE of Motion by Aaron R. DeCamp for presentment of motion to compel 61 before Honorable Susan E. Cox on 10/2/2008 at 09:30 AM. (DeCamp, Aaron) (Entered: 09/29/2008)
63 MINUTE entry before the Honorable Susan E. Cox: Motion hearing held 10/2/08. Plaintiff's motion to compel Employee Contact Information 59 is granted in part. Defendant has until 10/14/08 to provide plaintiff with contact information for unrepresented former managers of the defendant corporation in response to Interrogatory No. 7. Plaintiff will refrain from asking those former employees about conversations with Sears' attorneys. Defendant is given until 10/17/08 to determine which employees are current managers and, thereafter, are to provide contact information to plaintiff for those employees who are in fact not managers, in response to Interrogatory No. 7. Motion 61 is entered and continued. Parties are directed to further discuss the issues raised in plaintiff's motion, and pursuant to representations made in Court, the parties will alter the sequencing of the deposition schedule as necessary. Status hearing set for 10/16/08 at 9:30 a.m. Mailed notice (vkd, ) (Entered: 10/03/2008)
64 MOTION by Plaintiff Equal Employment Opportunity Commission to compel (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit 1, # 2 Exhibit 2, # 3 Exhibit 3, # 4 Exhibit 4)(DeCamp, Aaron) (Entered: 10/10/2008)
65 NOTICE of Motion by Aaron R. DeCamp for presentment of motion to compel 64 before Honorable Susan E. Cox on 10/16/2008 at 09:30 AM. (DeCamp, Aaron) (Entered: 10/10/2008)
66 RESPONSE by Sears Roebuck & Companyin Opposition to MOTION by Plaintiff Equal Employment Opportunity Commission to compel 64 Interrogatory No. 6. (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit 1, # 2 Exhibit 2)(Fain, Lisa) (Entered: 10/15/2008)
67 MINUTE entry before the Honorable Susan E. Cox: Motion hearing held. Status hearing held. Plaintiff's motion to compel 64 regarding Interrogatory No. 6 is granted. Defendant Sears Roebuck & Company is given until 11/6/08 to comply with Interrogatory No. 6 as outlined in open court. Plaintiff's motion to compel 61 is terminated as moot. Status hearing set for 11/12/08 at 9:30 a.m. is stricken. Status hearing set for 12/17/08 at 9:30 a.m. Mailed notice (vkd, ) (Entered: 10/17/2008)
68 TRANSCRIPT OF PROCEEDINGS held on 9/15/2008 before the Honorable Susan E. Cox. Court Reporter Contact Information: Riki Schatell, 773−728−7281, schatell@sbcglobal.net.

Case: 1:04-cv-7282 As of: 06/04/2017 06:12 PM CDT 8 of 12

10/27/2008
10/27/2008 10/28/2008 10/29/2008 10/30/2008
11/03/2008 11/03/2008 11/03/2008 11/04/2008 11/05/2008
11/05/2008 11/06/2008

IMPORTANT: The transcript may be viewed at the court's public terminal or purchased through the Court Reporter/Transcriber before the deadline for Release of Transcript Restriction. After that date it may be obtained through the Court Reporter/Transcriber or PACER. For further information on the redaction process, see the Court's web site at www.ilnd.uscourts.gov under Quick Links select Policy Regarding the Availability of Transcripts of Court Proceedings.
Redaction Request due 11/7/2008. Redacted Transcript Deadline set for 11/17/2008. Release of Transcript Restriction set for 1/15/2009. (cem, ) (Entered: 10/20/2008)
69 MOTION by Plaintiff Equal Employment Opportunity Commission to compel To Determine the Sufficiency Of Sears Answers To EEOCs First Request To Admit And To Deem the Requests Admitted (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit Request to Admit Facts, # 2 Exhibit Sears' Admissions, # 3 Exhibit SNR Letter to EEOC, # 4 Exhibit Accommodation Log, # 5 Exhibit EEOC letter to Sears)(Cohen, Ethan) (Entered: 10/27/2008)
70 NOTICE of Motion by Ethan M.M. Cohen for presentment of motion to compel, 69 before Honorable Susan E. Cox on 10/30/2008 at 09:30 AM. (Cohen, Ethan) (Entered: 10/27/2008)
71 MOTION by Plaintiff Equal Employment Opportunity Commission for discovery Exhibit 3 to Motion to Determine Sufficiency of Sears' Answers to EEOC's First Request to Admit (Elkin, Laurie) (Entered: 10/28/2008)
72 RESPONSE by Sears Roebuck & Company to MOTION by Plaintiff Equal Employment Opportunity Commission to compel To Determine the Sufficiency Of Sears Answers To EEOCs First Request To Admit And To Deem the Requests Admitted 69 (Fain, Lisa) (Entered: 10/29/2008)
73 MINUTE entry before the Honorable Susan E. Cox: Motion hearing held. Parties having engaged in a conference outside the presence of the Court, Plaintiff's motion to compel to determine the sufficiency of Sears' answers to EEOC's first request to admit and to deem the requests admitted 69 and Plaintiff's motion to compel to determine the sufficiency of Sears' answers to EEOC's first request to admit 71 are granted in part as outlined in open court. Status hearing date of 12/17/08 at 9:30 a.m. to stand. Mailed notice (vkd, ) (Entered: 10/30/2008)
74 ATTORNEY Appearance for Defendant Sears Roebuck & Company by Tobias Edward Schlueter (Schlueter, Tobias) (Entered: 11/03/2008)
75 MOTION by Defendant Sears Roebuck & Company for protective order DEFENDANT'S MOTION FOR ENTRY OF PROTECTIVE ORDER TO LIMIT DISCOVERY INTO PRIVILEGED COMMUNICATIONS HAD PURSUANT TO LEAVE POLICIES (Schlueter, Tobias) (Entered: 11/03/2008)
76 NOTICE of Motion by Tobias Edward Schlueter for presentment of motion for protective order 75 before Honorable Susan E. Cox on 11/6/2008 at 09:30 AM. (Schlueter, Tobias) (Entered: 11/03/2008)
77 ATTORNEY Appearance for Plaintiff Equal Employment Opportunity Commission by Deborah Lois Hamilton (Hamilton, Deborah) (Entered: 11/04/2008)
78 RESPONSE by Equal Employment Opportunity Commissionin Opposition to MOTION by Defendant Sears Roebuck & Company for protective order DEFENDANT'S MOTION FOR ENTRY OF PROTECTIVE ORDER TO LIMIT DISCOVERY INTO PRIVILEGED COMMUNICATIONS HAD PURSUANT TO LEAVE POLICIES 75 (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit 1, # 2 Exhibit 2, # 3 Exhibit 3, # 4 Exhibit 4, # 5 Exhibit 5, # 6 Exhibit 6, # 7 Exhibit 7, # 8 Exhibit 8)(DeCamp, Aaron) (Entered: 11/05/2008)
79 NOTICE by Equal Employment Opportunity Commission re response in opposition to motion, 78 (DeCamp, Aaron) (Entered: 11/05/2008)
80 MINUTE entry before the Honorable Susan E. Cox: Case called for motion hearing. Defendant's motion for entry of protective order to limit discovery into privileged communications had pursuant to leave policies 75 is taken under advisement. Ruling to be made by mail. Mailed notice (vkd, ) (Entered: 11/06/2008)

Case: 1:04-cv-7282 As of: 06/04/2017 06:12 PM CDT 9 of 12

11/18/2008 11/26/2008 11/26/2008 12/03/2008 12/04/2008 12/08/2008 12/08/2008 12/08/2008 12/08/2008 12/10/2008
12/10/2008
12/10/2008
12/11/2008

81 MINUTE entry before the Honorable Susan E. Cox:Defendant's motion for protective order to limit discovery into privileged communications had pursuant to leave policies 75 is denied. (For further details see minute order). Mailed notice (vkd, ) (Entered: 11/19/2008)
82 MOTION by Defendant Sears Roebuck & Company for reconsideration or clarification of the Court's November 18, 2008 Order (Schlueter, Tobias) (Entered: 11/26/2008)
83 NOTICE of Motion by Tobias Edward Schlueter for presentment of motion for reconsideration 82 before Honorable Susan E. Cox on 12/4/2008 at 09:30 AM. (Schlueter, Tobias) (Entered: 11/26/2008)
84 RESPONSE by Equal Employment Opportunity Commissionin Opposition to MOTION by Defendant Sears Roebuck & Company for reconsideration or clarification of the Court's November 18, 2008 Order 82 (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit)(Elkin, Laurie) (Entered: 12/03/2008)
85 MINUTE entry before the Honorable Susan E. Cox: Motion hearing held. Defendant's motion for reconsideration or clarification of the Court's 11/18/08 order 82 is denied as moot. Defendant has advised Plaintiff of their position and are proceeding in accordance with the Court's order. Mailed notice (vkd, ) (Entered: 12/05/2008)
86 MOTION by Plaintiff Equal Employment Opportunity Commission to compel Deem Facts Admitted (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit A, # 2 Exhibit B, # 3 Exhibit C, # 4 Certificate of Service, # 5 Notice of Filing)(Cohen, Ethan) (Entered: 12/08/2008)
87 NOTICE of Motion by Ethan M.M. Cohen for presentment of motion to compel 86 before Honorable Susan E. Cox on 12/11/2008 at 09:30 AM. (Cohen, Ethan) (Entered: 12/08/2008)
88 MOTION by Plaintiff Equal Employment Opportunity Commission for rule to show cause (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit A, # 2 Exhibit B, # 3 Exhibit C, # 4 Exhibit D, # 5 Exhibit E, # 6 Exhibit F, # 7 Exhibit G, # 8 Exhibit H, # 9 Certificate of Service, # 10 Notice of Filing)(Cohen, Ethan) (Entered: 12/08/2008)
89 NOTICE of Motion by Ethan M.M. Cohen for presentment of motion for rule to show cause, 88 before Honorable Susan E. Cox on 12/11/2008 at 09:30 AM. (Cohen, Ethan) (Entered: 12/08/2008)
90 RESPONSE by Sears Roebuck & Company to MOTION by Plaintiff Equal Employment Opportunity Commission to compel Deem Facts Admitted 86 Defendant Sears, Roebuck & Co.'s Response to Plaintiff EEOC's Second Motion to Determine the Sufficiency of Sears' Answers to EEOC's First Request to Admit and to Deem the Requests Admitted (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit, # 2 Exhibit, # 3 Exhibit)(Schlueter, Tobias) (Entered: 12/10/2008)
91 MOTION by Defendant Sears Roebuck & Company to set a briefing schedule on Plaintiff EEOC's Motion [Doc. #88] for an Order to Show Cause as to Why Defendant Sears Should Not Be Found in Contempt of this Court's October 16, 2008 Order Compelling Defendant Sears to Answer Interrogatory No. 6 (Schlueter, Tobias) (Entered: 12/10/2008)
92 RESPONSE by Defendant Sears Roebuck & Company to motion for rule to show cause, 88 Defendant Sears, Roebuck & Co.'s Request for Briefing Schedule on Plaintiff EEOC's Motion [Doc. #88] for an Order to Show Cause as to Why Defendant Sears Should Not be Found in Contempt of this Court's October 16, 2008 Order Compelling Defendant Sears to Answer Interrogatory No. 6 (Schlueter, Tobias) (Entered: 12/10/2008)
93 MINUTE entry before the Honorable Susan E. Cox: Case called for motion hearing. The parties agreed to meet and confer regarding the possible resolution of Plaintiff's motion to compel 86 and Defendant's motion to set a briefing schedule 91 on Plaintiff's motion for rule to show cause 88 . The Parties contacted the Court via telephone. The Court was advised that the parties have been working diligently throughout the day toward resolution of the pending motions. The parties expect to advise the Court of their progress at the next scheduled status hearing set for 12/17/08 at 9:30 a.m. Mailed notice (vkd, ) (Entered: 12/12/2008)

Case: 1:04-cv-7282 As of: 06/04/2017 06:12 PM CDT 10 of 12

12/15/2008

97 TRANSCRIPT OF PROCEEDINGS held on 11/6/08 before the Honorable Susan E. Cox. Court Reporter Contact Information: Riki Schatell, 773−728−7281, Schatell@sbcglobal.net.

IMPORTANT: The transcript may be viewed at the court's public terminal or purchased through the Court Reporter/Transcriber before the deadline for Release of Transcript Restriction. After that date it may be obtained through the Court Reporter/Transcriber or PACER. For further information on the redaction process, see the Court's web site at www.ilnd.uscourts.gov under Quick Links select Policy Regarding the Availability of Transcripts of Court Proceedings.

12/15/2008

Redaction Request due 1/5/2009. Redacted Transcript Deadline set for 1/15/2009. Release of Transcript Restriction set for 3/16/2009. (rp, ) (Entered: 12/22/2008)
98 TRANSCRIPT OF PROCEEDINGS held on 10/30/08 before the Honorable Susan E. Cox. Court Reporter Contact Information: Riki Schatell, 773−728−7281, Schatell@sbcglobal.net.

IMPORTANT: The transcript may be viewed at the court's public terminal or purchased through the Court Reporter/Transcriber before the deadline for Release of Transcript Restriction. After that date it may be obtained through the Court Reporter/Transcriber or PACER. For further information on the redaction process, see the Court's web site at www.ilnd.uscourts.gov under Quick Links select Policy Regarding the Availability of Transcripts of Court Proceedings.

12/15/2008

Redaction Request due 1/5/2009. Redacted Transcript Deadline set for 1/15/2009. Release of Transcript Restriction set for 3/16/2009. (rp, ) (Entered: 12/22/2008)
99 TRANSCRIPT OF PROCEEDINGS held on 10/16/08 before the Honorable Susan E. Cox. Court Reporter Contact Information: Riki Schatell, 773−728−7281, Schatell@sbcglobal.net.

IMPORTANT: The transcript may be viewed at the court's public terminal or purchased through the Court Reporter/Transcriber before the deadline for Release of Transcript Restriction. After that date it may be obtained through the Court Reporter/Transcriber or PACER. For further information on the redaction process, see the Court's web site at www.ilnd.uscourts.gov under Quick Links select Policy Regarding the Availability of Transcripts of Court Proceedings.

12/16/2008 12/16/2008 12/17/2008
12/24/2008 01/09/2009

Redaction Request due 1/5/2009. Redacted Transcript Deadline set for 1/15/2009. Release of Transcript Restriction set for 3/16/2009. (rp, ) (Entered: 12/22/2008)
94 ATTORNEY Appearance for Defendant Sears Roebuck & Company by Saira Janine Alikhan (Alikhan, Saira) (Entered: 12/16/2008)
95 ATTORNEY Appearance for Defendant Sears Roebuck & Company by Mariam Abdullahi Farah (Farah, Mariam) (Entered: 12/16/2008)
96 MINUTE entry before the Honorable Susan E. Cox: Status hearing held. The Parties advised the Court of the status of discovery. Based on the parties' intention to file a stipulation, Plaintiff's motion to determine the sufficiency of Sears' Amended Answers to EEOC's First Request to Admit and to Deem the Requests Admitted 86 and Plaintiff's motion for an Order to Show Cause as to why Defendant Sears should not be found in Contempt of this Court's 10/16/08 Order compelling Defendant Sears to Answer Interrogatory No. 6 88 are terminated as moot. Defendant's motion to set a briefing schedule on Plaintiff's motion for an order to show cause 91 is terminated as moot. Status hearing set for 1/26/09 at 9:30 a.m. Mailed notice (vkd, ) (Entered: 12/18/2008)
100 STIPULATION regarding order on motion to compel, order on rule to show cause, order on motion to set a briefing schedule, magistrate judge status hearing, set/reset hearings,,,,,,,,,,,,,,, 96 Joint agreement of the parties (King, Christopher) (Entered: 12/24/2008)
101 ATTORNEY Appearance for Defendant Sears Roebuck & Company by Tery A Gonsalves (Gonsalves, Tery) (Entered: 01/09/2009)

Case: 1:04-cv-7282 As of: 06/04/2017 06:12 PM CDT 11 of 12

01/09/2009 01/09/2009 01/13/2009 01/13/2009
01/15/2009
01/16/2009 01/26/2009
02/12/2009 02/12/2009 03/05/2009 03/18/2009 03/18/2009 03/23/2009
03/23/2009 03/25/2009 04/02/2009 06/29/2009
07/20/2009

102 MOTION by counsel for Defendant Sears Roebuck & Company to withdraw as attorney (Fain, Lisa) (Entered: 01/09/2009)
103 NOTICE of Motion by Lisa Zachary Fain for presentment of motion to withdraw as attorney 102 before Honorable Wayne R. Andersen on 1/15/2009 at 09:00 AM. (Fain, Lisa) (Entered: 01/09/2009)
104 MOTION by Defendant Sears Roebuck & Company for protective order Agreed Motion for Entry of an Amended Protective Order (Schlueter, Tobias) (Entered: 01/13/2009)
105 Notice of Motion for Entry of Amended Protective Order NOTICE of Motion by Tobias Edward Schlueter for presentment of motion for protective order 104 before Honorable Susan E. Cox on 1/22/2009 at 09:30 AM. (Schlueter, Tobias) (Entered: 01/13/2009)
106 MINUTE entry before the Honorable Wayne R. Andersen:Defendant's motion for leave to withdraw certain counsel of record 102 is granted. Lisa Z. Fain is given leave to withdraw her appearance. Agreed motion for protective order 104 is granted. Mailed notice (tsa, ) (Entered: 01/15/2009)
107 ATTORNEY Appearance for Defendant Sears Roebuck & Company by Samuel Phillip Linsenmaier (Linsenmaier, Samuel) (Entered: 01/16/2009)
108 MINUTE entry before the Honorable Susan E. Cox: Status hearing held. Settlement conference set for 3/5/09 at 10:00 a.m. The parties are to review and comply with this Court's Standing Order Setting Settlement Conference. Copies are available in chambers or through the Judge Cox's web page at www.ilnd.uscourts.gov. Mailed notice (vkd, ) (Entered: 01/26/2009)
109 MINUTE entry before the Honorable Susan E. Cox: Enter Amended Protective Order. (For further detail, see order). Mailed notice (vkd, ) (Entered: 02/12/2009)
110 AMENDED PROTECTIVE Order. Signed by the Honorable Susan E. Cox on 2/12/09.(vkd, ) (Entered: 02/12/2009)
111 MINUTE entry before the Honorable Susan E. Cox:Settlement conference held on 3/5/09. Status hearing set for 6/29/09 at 9:30 a.m. Mailed notice (vkd, ) (Entered: 03/05/2009)
112 MOTION by Plaintiff Equal Employment Opportunity Commission for order entering agreed stipulation (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit Agreed Stipulation and Order)(Hamilton, Deborah) (Entered: 03/18/2009)
113 NOTICE of Motion by Deborah Lois Hamilton for presentment of motion for order 112 before Honorable Susan E. Cox on 3/31/2009 at 09:30 AM. (Hamilton, Deborah) (Entered: 03/18/2009)
114 MINUTE entry before the Honorable Susan E. Cox: Plaintiff's motion for order entering agreed stipulation (112) is granted. Parties need not appear on 3/31/09 at 9:30 a.m. for presentment of said motion. Enter Agreed Stipulation and Order. (For further details, see separate order). Mailed notice (vkd, ) (Entered: 03/23/2009)
115 AGREED STIPULATION and Order. Signed by the Honorable Susan E. Cox on 3/23/09:(vkd, ) (Entered: 03/23/2009)
116 MINUTE entry before the Honorable Susan E. Cox: Settlement Conference set for 4/6/09 at 10:00 a.m. Mailed notice (vkd, ) (Entered: 03/25/2009)
117 MINUTE entry before the Honorable Susan E. Cox: Settlement conference set for 4/6/09 at 1:30 p.m. is stricken. Mailed notice (vkd, ) (Entered: 04/02/2009)
118 MINUTE entry before the Honorable Susan E. Cox: Status hearing held. The Court was advised by the parties that they have an agreement, but will need additional time to finalize settlement documents. Status hearing set for 7/20/09 at 9:30 a.m. Mailed notice (vkd, ) (Entered: 06/29/2009)
119 MINUTE entry before the Honorable Susan E. Cox: Status hearing held. Parties requested a short date to finalize settlement documents. Status hearing set for 8/10/09 at 9:30 a.m. Mailed notice (vkd, ) (Entered: 07/20/2009)

Case: 1:04-cv-7282 As of: 06/04/2017 06:12 PM CDT 12 of 12

08/10/2009
09/08/2009
09/29/2009 09/29/2009 09/29/2009 09/30/2009 09/30/2009 01/27/2010 01/27/2010 02/04/2010

120 MINUTE entry before the Honorable Susan E. Cox: Status hearing held. Parties advised the Court the parties have reached an agreement and are trying to resolve the only remaining issue of the identity for cy pres fund. The parties expect to submit a consent decree to the district court within a week or two. Status hearing set for 9/8/09 at 9:30 a.m. Mailed notice (vkd, ) (Entered: 08/10/2009)
121 MINUTE entry before the Honorable Susan E. Cox: Status hearing held. Consent decree has been sent to client for approval. Parties expect the consent decree to be filed by this week. All matters relating to the referral of this action having been resolved, this case is returned to the assigned judge. Case no longer referred to the Honorable Susan E. Cox. Mailed notice (vkd, ) (Entered: 09/08/2009)
122 MINUTE entry before the Honorable Wayne R. Andersen:Enter consent decree. The Court retains jurisdiction of this matter to enforce the decree. Civil case terminated. Mailed notice (tsa, ) (Entered: 09/29/2009)
123 ORDER Signed by the Honorable Wayne R. Andersen on 9/29/2009.(tsa, ) (Entered: 09/29/2009)
124 MINUTE entry before the Honorable Wayne R. Andersen: Enter original signature page of the consent decree. [For further detail see separate order(s). Mailed notices (gcy, ) (Entered: 09/30/2009)
125 MINUTE entry before the Honorable Wayne R. Andersen:Enter exhibit to consent decree.Mailed notice (tsa, ) (Entered: 09/30/2009)
126 ORDER Signed by the Honorable Wayne R. Andersen on 9/30/2009.(tsa, ) (Entered: 09/30/2009)
127 MOTION by Plaintiff Equal Employment Opportunity Commission to approve consent judgment and Approval of Allocation of Settlement Funds (DeCamp, Aaron) (Entered: 01/27/2010)
128 NOTICE of Motion by Aaron R. DeCamp for presentment of motion to approve consent judgment 127 before Honorable Wayne R. Andersen on 2/4/2010 at 09:00 AM. (DeCamp, Aaron) (Entered: 01/27/2010)
129 MINUTE entry before Honorable Wayne R. Andersen:Plaintiff Equal Employment Opportunity Commission motion to approve consent judgment and Approval of Allocation of Settlement Funds 127 is granted. Advised in open court notice (tsa, ) (Entered: 02/04/2010)

 
 Federal Court Says EEOC Disability Blas Lawsuit Against Sears Roebuc...

http://eeoc.gov/press/8-2-05.html

The U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE August 2, 2005

CONTACT:

Aaron DeCamp EEOC Trial Attorney (312) 353-7582 TTY (312) 353-2421

Gregory Gochanour EEOC Supervisory Trial Attorney (312) 886-9124

John C. Hendrickson EEOC Regional Attorney (312) 353-8551

FEDERAL COURT SAYS EEOC DISABILITY BIAS LAWSUIT AGAINST SEARS ROEBUCK TO PROCEED
Discovery Allowed On Class Claim That Inflexible Leave Policy Failed To Reasonably Accommodate Disabled Employees
CHICAGO -- The U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) announced here today that it has received a decision from Federal District Court in Chicago permitting its class case under the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) to proceed against Sears, Roebuck & Company.
According to the EEOC, U.S. District Judge Wayne R. Anderson has denied Sears' motion to dismiss the case which alleges that the giant retailer failed to provide one of its Chicago-area employees, John Bava, with a reasonable accommodation after he was injured while working for Sears. EEOC is also seeking relief on behalf of a class of all Sears employees with disabilities who lost their jobs because of Sears' inflexible application of its one year worker's compensation or medical-disability leave policy. EEOC contends that Sears violated Title I of the Americans With Disabilities Act (ADA) by terminating Bava and other employees because they spent more than one year on disability leave and without regard to their individual circumstances and return-to-work prospects.
In denying Sear's motion to dismiss the case, Judge Anderson wrote, "Even if the EEOC were required to plead a prima facie case of disability discrimination, we believe [the facts in the Complaint] would survive a [motion to dismiss.]"
"As for the class allegations," Judge Anderson continued, "the Complaint alleges that Sears 'maintained an inflexible worker's compensation one year leave policy which does not provide for reasonable accommodation of employees with disabilities.' We find that the issue of whether defendant's leave policy fails to accommodate its disabled employees is an issue upon which defendants have been given notice and is a claim for which [EEOC is] entitled to discovery."
The EEOC lawsuit was filed November 10, 2004, in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Illinois and captioned EEOC v. Sears, Roebuck & Co., Civil Action No. 04 C 7282. Judge Andersen's decision was dated July 22, 2005, and mailed to the parties.
Bava worked as a Service Technician out of Sears' Waukegan Road store in Bannock-burn, Illinois, north of Chicago. He was injured when he fell while on the job in April 2001. Although Bava took leave to recover, his injuries left him substantially impaired in his ability to perform physical tasks. According to EEOC, within three months after his injury Bava sought placement in two less physically demanding positions for which he was qualified, but Sears refused to place hire him in either position. As a result, he remained on leave because he was unable to return to his prior service technician job. Ultimately, his employment was terminated under Sears' disability or worker's compensation leave policy that inflexibly mandates the termination of employees on leave for more than one year.
John Hendrickson, EEOC Regional Attorney in Chicago said, "Sears is an enormous operation and whether or not it complies with the ADA makes a huge difference to thousands of workers. In EEOC's view, sending individuals with disabilities home when they could be working and then firing them when they've been at home 'too long' cannot be squared with what the ADA requires of employers. So we are pleased with the

1 of 2

5/31/2007 12:47 PM

Federal Court Says EEOC Disability Blas Lawsuit Against Sears Roebuc...

http://eeoc.gov/press/8-2-05.html

Court's decision that EEOC's case is going to go forward."
In addition to Hendrickson, EEOC attorneys on the case are Supervisory Trial Attorney Gregory Gochanour and Trial Attorneys Ethan Cohen and Aaron DeCamp.
EEOC is the federal agency charged with the administration, interpretation and enforcement of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, as amended, which prohibits employment discrimination based on race, color, religion, sex, pregnancy or national origin. The EEOC is also responsible for enforcing the Age Discrimination in Employment Act of 1967, as amended; the Equal Pay Act of 1963; and the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990, which prohibits discrimination based on disability. More information about the EEOC and the laws it enforces can also be found at www.eeoc.gov.
This page was last modified on August 2, 2005.

Return to Home Page

2 of 2

5/31/2007 12:47 PM