Case 5:02-cv-04614-JF Document 1 Filed 09/24/2002 Page 1 of 5

1 WILLIAM R. TAMAYO (CA Bar No. 084965) JONATHAN T. PECK (VA Bar No. 12303)
2 EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY COMMISSION San Francisco District Office
3 901 Market Street, Suite 500 San Francisco, CA 94103
4 Telephone No. (415) 356-5085 Facsimile No. (415) 356-5046
5 LUCILA G. ROSAS (CA Bar No. 187345)
6 EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY COMMISSION San Jose Local Office
7 96 North Third Street, Suite 200 San Jose, CA 95112
8 Telephone No. (408) 291- 6401 Facsimile No. (408) 291- 4539
9 Attorneys for Plaintiff
10 Equal Employment Opportunity Commission

11

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

12

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

13

SAN JOSE DIVISION

14

)

EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY ) CIVIL ACTION NO.

15 COMMISSION,

)

16 Plaintiff,
17 v.
18

)

)

) )

COMPLAINT

)

Civil Rights

)

Employment Discrimination

19 FRESH EXPRESS, INC.,

)

)

JURY TRIAL DEMAND

)

20

Defendant.

)

)

21

)

22 NATURE OF THE ACTION
23 This is an action under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and Title I of the Civil
24 Rights Act of 1991 to correct unlawful employment practices on the basis of sex, retaliation and
25 constructive discharge and to provide appropriate relief to Ms. Armida Urquizo aggrieved by
26 Defendant’s unlawful practices described herein. As alleged below, Defendant Fresh Express,
27 Inc., (hereinafter “Defendant”) unlawfully subjected Ms. Urquizo to sexual harassment, creating
28

COMPLAINT
1

Case 5:02-cv-04614-JF Document 1 Filed 09/24/2002 Page 2 of 5

1 an offensive, hostile, abusive work environment. Plaintiff further alleges that Defendant

2 subjected Ms. Urquizo to retaliation after she complained about and/or rejected the unlawful

3 harassment.

4

JURISDICTION AND VENUE

5

1. Jurisdiction of this Court is invoked pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §§ 451, 1331, 1337,

6 1343 and 1345. This action is authorized and instituted pursuant to Section 706 (f) (1) and (3) of

7 Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, as amended (Title VII), 42 U.S.C. §2000e-5 (f) (1) and

8 (3), and Section 102 of the Civil Rights Act of 1991, 42 U.S.C. §1981(a).

9

INTRA-DISTRICT ASSIGNMENT

10

2. This action is appropriate for assignment to the San Jose division because the

11 unlawful employment practices alleged were committed within Santa Clara County, within the

12 jurisdiction of the United States District Court for the Northern District of California.

13

PARTIES

14

3. Plaintiff, the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (the "Commission"), is

15 the agency of the United States of America charged with the administration, interpretation and

16 enforcement of Title VII, and is expressly authorized to bring this action by Sections 706 (f) (1)

17 and (3) of Title VII, 42 U.S.C. §2000e-5 (f) (1) and (3).

18

4. At all relevant times, Fresh Express, Inc. (hereinafter “Defendant”) has

19 continuously been, and is now, a California corporation, qualified and doing business in the state

20 of California and the city of Salinas and has continuously had and does now have at least 15

21 employees.

22

5. At all relevant times, Defendant has continuously been, and is now, an employer

23 engaged in an industry affecting commerce within the meaning of Sections 701(b), (g) and (h) of

24 Title VII, 42 U.S.C. §§ 2000e(b), (g) and (h).

25

STATEMENT OF CLAIMS

26

6. More than thirty days prior to the institution of this lawsuit, Ms. Armida Urquizo

27 filed a charge with the Commission alleging violations of Title VII by Defendant. All conditions

28 precedent to the institution of this lawsuit have been fulfilled.

COMPLAINT
2

Case 5:02-cv-04614-JF Document 1 Filed 09/24/2002 Page 3 of 5

1

7. Since at least January 1994, Defendant has engaged in unlawful employment

2 practices in violation of Section 703 (a) (1) of Title VII, 42 U.S.C. § 2000e-2 (a) (1). These

3 practices include subjecting Ms. Urquizo to a sexually hostile, abusive, intimidating and

4 offensive work environment, which culminated in a tangible employment action.

5

8. Since at least January 1998, Defendant subjected Ms. Urquizo to adverse

6 employment actions in retaliation for her opposition to and rejection of the sexual harassment in

7 violation of Section 704 (a) of Title VII, 42 U.S.C. Section 2000e-3 (a). These practices include

8 but are not limited to reduction of hours, change in work schedule and continued harassment.

9

9. The effect of the practices complained of above has been to deprive Ms. Urquizo

10 of equal employment opportunities and otherwise adversely affect her employment status

11 because of sexual harassment and on account of retaliation.

12

10. The unlawful employment practices complained of above were and are

13 intentional.

14

11. The unlawful employment practices complained of above were done with malice

15 and/or reckless indifference to the federally protected rights of Ms. Urquizo.

16

PRAYER FOR RELIEF

17

Wherefore, the Commission respectfully requests that this Court:

18

A. Grant a permanent injunction enjoining Defendant, its officers, successors,

19 assigns, and all persons in active concert or participation with it, from engaging in sexual

20 harassment, retaliation and any other employment practice which discriminates on the basis of

21 sex.

22

B. Order Defendant to institute and carry out policies, practices, and programs which

23 provide equal employment opportunities for women and those persons who complain about

24 sexual harassment, and which eradicate the effects of its past and present unlawful employment

25 practices.

26

C. Order Defendant to make whole Ms. Urquizo by providing appropriate back pay

27 and benefits with prejudgment interest and other affirmative relief necessary to eradicate the

28 effects of their unlawful employment practices, including other appropriate relief to be

COMPLAINT
3

Case 5:02-cv-04614-JF Document 1 Filed 09/24/2002 Page 4 of 5

1 determined at trial.

2

D. Order Defendant to make whole Ms. Urquizo by providing compensation for past

3 and future pecuniary losses resulting from the unlawful employment practices complained of

4 above, including but not limited to medical expenses or other out of pocket expenses in amounts

5 to be determined at trial.

6

E. Order Defendant to make whole Ms. Urquizo by providing compensation for past

7 and future non-pecuniary losses resulting from the unlawful practices complained of above,

8 including but not limited to pain and suffering, emotional distress, indignity, loss of enjoyment of

9 life, loss of self-esteem and humiliation, in amounts to be determined at trial.

10

F. Order Defendant to pay Ms. Urquizo punitive damages for its malicious and

11 reckless conduct complained of above, in amounts to be determined at trial.

12

G. Grant such further relief as the Court deems necessary and proper in the public

13 interest.

14

H. Award the Commission its costs of this action.

15 ///

16 ///

17 ///

18 ///

19 ///

20 ///

21 ///

22 ///

23 ///

24 ///

25 ///

26 ///

27 ///

28 ///

COMPLAINT
4

Case 5:02-cv-04614-JF Document 1 Filed 09/24/2002 Page 5 of 5

1

JURY TRIAL DEMAND

2

The Commission requests a jury trial on all questions of fact raised by its complaint.

3

4

5

Respectfully submitted,

6

7

NICHOLAS INZEO

Acting General Counsel

8

EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY

9

COMMISSION

Office of the General Counsel

10

Washington, DC 20507

11

12 Dated:
13
14

s/ William R. Tamayo WILLIAM R. TAMAYO Regional Attorney

15

16 Dated: 17

s/ Jonathan T. Peck JONATHAN T. PECK Supervisory Trial Attorney

18

19 Dated: 20

s/ Lucila G. Rosas LUCILA G. ROSAS Trial Attorney

21

22

EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY

COMMISSION

23

San Jose Local Office

96 North Third Street, Suite 200

24

San Jose, CA 95112

25

26

27

28

COMPLAINT
5

 
 Case 5:02-cv-04614-JF Document 18 Filed 04/23/2003 Page 1 of 12

1 Michael Meuter, California State Bar No. 161554 CALIFORNIA RURAL LEGAL ASSISTANCE, Inc.
2 3 Williams Road Salinas, CA 93905
3 Telephone: (831) 757-5221 Facsimile: (831) 757-6212
4 Attorneys for Plaintiff/Intervenor
5 ARMIDA URQUIZO

6

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

7

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

8 EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY ) CASE NO. C-02-04614 JF (HRL)

COMMISSION,

)

9

) COMPLAINT IN INTERVENTION

Plaintiff,

) FOR DAMAGES AND

10

) DEMAND FOR JURY TRIAL

)

11 ARMIDA URQUIZO,

) 1. Unlawful Sex Discrimination (42 U.S.C.

)

§ 2000e)

12

) 2. Hostile Environment Sexual Harassment

Plaintiff/Intervenor

)

(Title VII, 42 U.S.C. §2000e-2(a)(1)

13

) 3. Unlawful Retaliation (42 U.S.C. §

v.

)

2000e-3(a))

14

) 4. Unlawful Sex Discrimination (Cal. Gov

FRESH EXPRESS INC.,

)

Code § 12940(a))

15

) 5. Retaliation for Opposing Discrimination

)

and Harassment (Cal. Gov. Code §

16

)

12940(h)

Defendant.

) 6. Aiding and Abetting Sexual Harassment,

17

)

Sex Discrimination, and Retaliation

)

(Cal. Gov. Code § 12940(i))

18

) 7. Hostile Environment Sexual Harassment

)

(Cal. Gov. Code § 12940(j)(1))

19

) 8. Failure to Prevent Discrimination and

)

Harassment (Cal. Gov. Code §

20

)

12940 (k))

)

21

)

)

22 _______________________________________)

23 ///
24 ///
25 ///
26 ///
27 ///
28

Plaintiff/Intervenor s Complaint for

Damages and Demand for Jury Trial

1

Case 5:02-cv-04614-JF Document 18 Filed 04/23/2003 Page 2 of 12

1

PARTIES

2

1.Plaintiff ARMIDA URQUIZO (hereinafter URQUIZO ), at all times relevant herein,

3 was a resident of the State of California, County of Monterey. Plaintiff URQUIZO was at all

4 times material hereto a member of a protected group under California Government Code Section

5 12940(a) based on her sex (female), and Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 (Title VII) as

6 amended, 42 U.S.C. §2000e-5 (f) (1) and (3), and Section 102 of the Civil Rights Act of 1991, 42

7 U.S.C. §1981(a).

8

2. Plaintiff URQUIZO is informed and believes that defendant FRESH EXPRESS

9 INC., (hereafter FRESH EXPRESS ) is a Delaware corporation, and was at all relevant times, a

10 corporation organized and existing under the laws of the State of California, with its principal

11 business office located in the city of Salinas, California in the County of Monterey.

12

3. Plaintiff is informed and believes, and thereon alleges, that Defendant FRESH

13 EXPRESS INC. regularly employs five or more persons, and accordingly is an employer within

14 the meaning of Cal. Gov. Code §§ 12926(d), 12940.

15

4. Plaintiff is informed and believes, and thereon alleges, at all times relevant hereto

16 that Defendant FRESH EXPRESS, INC. regularly employed fifteen or more persons for each

17 working day in each of twenty or more calendar weeks in the current and preceding calendar

18 years, and accordingly is an employer within the meaning of 42 U.S.C. § 2000e(b).

19

JURISDICTION AND VENUE

20

5. The jurisdiction of this Court is based upon section 703(a)(1) Title VII of the Civil

21 Rights Act of 1964, as amended, 42 U.S.C. § 2000e-2(a)(1). Jurisdiction of this Court is also

22 invoked pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §§ 1331, 1337, 1343 and 1346 and the Court s supplemental

23 jurisdiction over state law claims. Injunctive and declaratory relief, damages and other

24 appropriate legal and equitable relief are sought pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 2000e (f) and (g) as

25 amended, and state law. The unlawful employment practices of which plaintiffs complain

26 occurred within the Northern District of California and defendant FRESH EXPRESS INC. has

27 business operations where plaintiff worked at all relevant times alleged herein in the Northern

28

Plaintiff/Intervenor s Complaint for

Damages and Demand for Jury Trial

2

Case 5:02-cv-04614-JF Document 18 Filed 04/23/2003 Page 3 of 12

1 District of California. Venue is therefore proper in this District pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 2000e-

2 5(f)(3). Venue is also proper in this District pursuant to 18 U.S.C. §§ 1965(a) and 1965(b), and

3 28 U.S.C. § 1391(e).

4

INTRA-DISTRICT ASSIGNMENT

5

6. Since the acts which gave rise to this complaint occurred in Monterey County,

6 assignment to the San Jose Division pursuant to Civil L.R. 3-2(c) would be appropriate.

7

EXHAUSTION OF ADMINISTRATIVE REMEDIES

8

7. On or around July 26, 1999, Plaintiff URQUIZO filed charges of

9 discrimination with the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (hereafter EEOC ). This

10 charge was simultaneously filed with the California Department of Fair Employment and

11 Housing (hereafter DFEH ) pursuant to the terms of a work sharing agreement between the two

12 agencies.

13

8. On or around July 29, 1999 notice of Plaintiff URQUIZO S right to file a

14 private civil suit was issued by the EEOC. The EEOC issued the right to sue letters after DFEH

15 deferred its investigations of plaintiffs discrimination charges to the EEOC pursuant to the terms

16 of a work sharing agreement between the two agencies. The one-year period following the

17 issuance of these notices within which to file an action for violation of the FEHA was equitably

18 tolled during the pendency of the EEOC investigation.

19

9. On or about September 24, 2002 the EEOC concluded investigation of the case

20 and thereafter filed suit in the instant matter.

21

10. Plaintiff URQUIZO has timely filed this action. Therefore, she has complied with

22 all administrative prerequisites to be able to bring this lawsuit.

23

FACTS

24

11. URQUIZO began working at FRESH EXPRESS INC. in approximately 1992.

25 URQUIZO worked in inventory in the plant supply room, among other positions with Defendant.

26

12. Nazario Ramirez (hereafter Ramirez ) was employed by Fresh Express from at

27 least 1994, and, on information and belief, he held the position of manager/supervisor of the

28

Plaintiff/Intervenor s Complaint for

Damages and Demand for Jury Trial

3

Case 5:02-cv-04614-JF Document 18 Filed 04/23/2003 Page 4 of 12

1 warehouse for Fresh Express Inc. from at least 1997 until he ended employment with Fresh

2 Express Inc. in approximately August 1999.

3

13. In 1994, Ramirez commenced a continual course of conduct, wherein he sexually

4 harassed URQUIZO. This harassment was severe and pervasive enough to alter her working

5 conditions and create a hostile work environment. URQUIZO was repeatedly forced to endure

6 offensive language, and intimidating and unwelcome romantic and/or sexual overtures. Among

7 other acts, RAMIREZ exposed himself to URQUIZO at the workplace and continuously

8 pressured URQUIZO to invite him to her house or go to a motel with RAMIREZ to have sexual

9 intercourse.

10

14. RAMIREZ s sexual harassment was repeated and was designed to compel

11 URQUIZO to submit to his sexual advances, thereby rendering URQUIZO S submission to his

12 sexual advances a term or condition of her employment.

13

15. Defendant s sexual harassment of URQUIZO continued throughout 1999, even

14 after URQUIZO repeatedly made clear that she wanted the harassment to stop.

15

16. Defendant s sexual harassment of URQUIZO substantially affected her

16 employment. Defendant, their agents, servants and/or employees, through their sexual

17 harassment and their failure to eradicate it, intended to, and did, cause URQUIZO severe

18 psychological and emotional damage. Through their acts and omissions which constituted sexual

19 harassment, abuse, discrimination, and retaliation toward Plaintiff, Defendant, its agents, servants

20 and/or employees, have caused URQUIZO to suffer extreme anxiety, severe depression, and

21 other emotional distress. Defendant s conduct has adversely affected URQUIZO S ability to

22 work, and her sense of well-being. The abuse of URQUIZO by Defendant, its agents, servants

23 and/or employees, and Defendant s failure to stop such abuse, rendered her work environment so

24 intolerable that any reasonable person would find such treatment offensive.

25

17. Following Defendant s commencement of these acts of sexual harassment,

26 URQUIZO made complaints to Defendant. For making these complaints, Defendants subjected

27 her to retaliation in the form of further unwanted sexual advances and assigning her to less

28

Plaintiff/Intervenor s Complaint for

Damages and Demand for Jury Trial

4

Case 5:02-cv-04614-JF Document 18 Filed 04/23/2003 Page 5 of 12

1 favorable work assignments.

2

18. Despite URQUIZO s complaints to the Defendant, FRESH EXPRESS INC.

3 effectively failed and refused to terminate the course of repetitively offensive conduct of Ramirez

4 and others, all of which constituted sexual harassment of URQUIZO. Defendant took no action

5 to address, correct, or prevent these adverse working conditions of sexual harassment, retaliation,

6 and discrimination, thereby condoning such illegal acts and transforming the acceptance of

7 Ramirez s sexual advances into a condition of Plaintiff s continued employment.

8

19. Defendant, its agents, servants and/or employees committed the acts against

9 URQUIZO alleged herein maliciously, fraudulently, and oppressively, with the wrongful

10 intention of injuring URQUIZO and in conscious disregard of, and with reckless indifference to,

11 her rights.

12

FIRST CLAIM FOR RELIEF

(UNLAWFUL EMPLOYMENT DISCRIMINATION BASED ON SEX)

13

(TITLE VII, 42 U.S.C. § 2000e)

14

20. Plaintiff hereby incorporates by reference paragraphs 1 through 19 of this

15 complaint as if fully set forth herein.

16

21. At all times relevant hereto, Plaintiff was an employee of Defendant.

17

22. Defendant unlawfully discriminated against Plaintiff URQUIZO based on her

18 sex, in violation of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, 42 U.S.C. §2000e-16.

19

23. Defendant treated Plaintiff URQUIZO less favorably than similarly situated

20 male employees, subjecting her to discrimination in work assignments and in other terms and

21 conditions of her employment in violation of Title VII.

22

24. As a direct and proximate result of the aforesaid discrimination based on

23 plaintiff s sex, Plaintiff URQUIZO has sustained a loss of earnings and other benefits.

24 URQUIZO has also suffered severe emotional distress manifested by feelings of humiliation,

25 embarrassment, anxiety, nervousness and other symptoms of stress.

26

25. Defendant s acts of discrimination against Plaintiff on the basis of sex were

27 wanton, willful and intentional with malicious and reckless disregard of the rights and

28

Plaintiff/Intervenor s Complaint for

Damages and Demand for Jury Trial

5

Case 5:02-cv-04614-JF Document 18 Filed 04/23/2003 Page 6 of 12

1 sensibilities of the Plaintiff.

2

WHEREFORE, Plaintiff URQUIZO requests relief as hereinafter provided.

3

SECOND CLAM FOR RELIEF

(SEXUAL HARASSMENT)

4

(TITLE VII, 42 U.S.C. § 2000e-2(a)(1))

5

26. Plaintiff hereby incorporates by reference paragraphs 1 through 25 of this

6 complaint as if fully set forth herein.

7

27. Defendant violated Plaintiff s rights under Title VII by subjecting Plaintiff to

8 unwelcome sexual comments and acts and permitting and encouraging a work environment in

9 which plaintiff URQUIZO was subjected to ridicule, harassment, discrimination and intimidation

10 because of her sex.

11

28. In addition, Defendant subjected Plaintiff to quid pro quo sexual harassment by

12 threatening Plaintiff s job and or conditioning plaintiff s employment on the requirement that she

13 remain under RAMIREZ s supervision.

14

29. Defendant FRESH EXPRESS INC. participated in creating and maintaining a

15 hostile work environment and failed to investigate, stop or prevent the incidents of sexual

16 harassment even after Plaintiff URQUIZO gave notice of such incidents. The sexual harassment

17 was severe and pervasive such that it altered the terms and conditions of Plaintiff s employment.

18

30. As a direct and proximate result of the aforesaid harassment based on sex,

19 Plaintiff URQUIZO has sustained injury in the form of severe emotional distress, humiliation,

20 embarrassment, and mental anguish, all to her damage in amounts to be established at trial.

21

31. As described above, Defendant s aforesaid acts of harassment were wanton,

22 willful and intentional with malicious and reckless disregard for the rights and sensibilities of

23 Plaintiff URQUIZO.

24

WHEREFORE, Plaintiff URQUIZO requests relief as hereinafter provided.

25

THIRD CLAIM FOR RELIEF

UNLAWFUL RETALIATION

26

(42 U.S.C. § 2000e-3(a))

27

32. Plaintiff hereby incorporates by reference paragraphs 1 through 31 of this

28

Plaintiff/Intervenor s Complaint for

Damages and Demand for Jury Trial

6

Case 5:02-cv-04614-JF Document 18 Filed 04/23/2003 Page 7 of 12

1 complaint as if fully set forth herein.

2

33. In perpetrating the above described actions and omissions, Defendant FRESH

3 EXPRESS INC., as employer, its agents, servants and/or employees, engaged in unlawful

4 retaliation in violation of Title VII.

5

34. Plaintiff engaged in protected activity when she complained to her direct

6 supervisors, including RAMIREZ and others, about sexual harassment, retaliation and

7 discrimination.

8

35. Defendant, its agents, servants and/or employees retaliated against Plaintiff on the

9 basis of Plaintiff s complaints by taking adverse actions against her, including by creating a

10 hostile work environment, by imposing different terms, conditions, or privileges of employment

11 on Plaintiff, and by other retaliatory treatment and actions.

12

36. As a direct and proximate result of the aforesaid retaliation, Plaintiff URQUIZO

13 has sustained injury in the form of severe emotional distress, humiliation, embarrassment, and

14 mental anguish, all to the damage in amount to be established at trial.

15

37. As described above, Defendant s aforesaid acts of harassment were wanton,

16 willful and intentional with malicious and reckless disregard for the rights and sensibilities of

17 Plaintiff URQUIZO.

18

WHEREFORE, Plaintiff URQUIZO requests relief as hereinafter provided.

19

FOURTH CLAIM FOR RELIEF

(UNLAWFUL EMPLOYMENT DISCRIMINATION BASED ON SEX)

20

(CALIFORNIA GOVERNMENT CODE § 12940(a))

21

38. Plaintiff hereby incorporates by reference paragraphs 1 through 37 of this

22 complaint as if fully set forth herein.

23

39. At all times material hereto, Defendant owed Plaintiff URQUIZO the duty not

24 to discriminate against her in the terms and conditions of her employment on the basis of her

25 gender as mandated by the Fair Employment and Housing Act provided in California

26 Government Code section 12940(a).

27

40. In violation of the aforesaid duty, Defendant treated Plaintiff URQUIZO

28

Plaintiff/Intervenor s Complaint for

Damages and Demand for Jury Trial

7

Case 5:02-cv-04614-JF Document 18 Filed 04/23/2003 Page 8 of 12

1 adversely and differently from her male counterparts.

2

41. Defendant s decision to treat Plaintiff URQUIZO in the foregoing adverse and

3 disparate manner was based upon Plaintiff s sex and was wanton, willful and intentional with

4 malicious and reckless disregard of the rights and sensibilities of the Plaintiff.

5

42. As a direct and proximate result of the aforesaid discrimination based on sex,

6 Plaintiff URQUIZO has sustained a loss of earnings and fringe benefits. She has also suffered

7 emotional distress manifested by feelings of humiliation, embarrassment, anxiety, nervousness

8 and other symptoms of stress.

9

43. In doing the acts herein alleged, defendant acted maliciously, and oppressively,

10 with the wrongful intent of injuring Plaintiff URQUIZO, and acted with an improper and evil

11 motive amounting to malice, in conscious disregard of plaintiff s rights. Because the acts taken

12 towards her were carried out by defendant acting in a despicable, deliberate, and intentional

13 manner in order to injure and damage her, plaintiff is entitled to recover punitive damages in an

14 amount according to proof.

15

WHEREFORE, Plaintiff URQUIZO requests relief as hereinafter provided.

16

FIFTH CLAIM FOR RELIEF

RETALIATION FOR OPPOSING DISCRIMINATION

17

AND HARASSMENT (CAL. GOV. CODE §12940(h))

18

44. Plaintiff hereby incorporates by reference paragraphs 1 through 43 of this

19 complaint as if fully set forth herein.

20

45.In perpetrating the above described actions and omissions, Defendant FRESH

21 EXPRESS INC, as employer, its agents, servants and/or employees, engaged in unlawful

22 retaliation in violation of the California Fair Employment and Housing Act ( FEHA ), Cal. Gov.

23 Code § 12940(h).

24

46. Plaintiff engaged in protected activity by complaining to a supervisor, including

25 Ramirez and others, regarding sexual harassment, retaliation, and/or discrimination.

26

47. Defendant, their agents, servants and/or employees retaliated against Plaintiff on

27 the basis of her protected activity and took adverse actions against her including creating a

28

Plaintiff/Intervenor s Complaint for

Damages and Demand for Jury Trial

8

Case 5:02-cv-04614-JF Document 18 Filed 04/23/2003 Page 9 of 12

1 hostile work environment, by imposing different terms, conditions, or privileges of employment

2 on Plaintiff, and by other retaliatory treatment and actions.

3

48. Defendant FRESH EXPRESS INC. participated in creating and maintaining the

4 hostile work environment and failed to investigate, stop or prevent the incidents of sexual

5 harassment even after Plaintiff gave notice of such incidents.

6

49. As a direct and proximate result of the aforesaid retaliation Plaintiff URQUIZO

7 has sustained emotional distress, humiliation, embarrassment, and mental anguish, all to her

8 damage in amounts to be established at trial.

9

50. Defendant s aforesaid acts of retaliation were wanton, willful and intentional with

10 malicious and reckless disregard for the rights and sensibilities of Plaintiff.

11

WHEREFORE, Plaintiff requests relief as hereinafter provided.

12

SIXTH CLAIM FOR RELIEF

AIDING AND ABETTING SEXUAL HARASSMENT

13

SEX DISCRIMINATION, AND RETALIATION

(CAL. GOV. CODE § 12940(i))

14

51. Plaintiffs hereby incorporate by reference paragraphs 1 through 50 of this

15 complaint as if fully set forth herein.

16

52. In perpetrating the above described actions and omissions, Defendant FRESH

17 EXPRESS INC., as employer, its agents, servants and/or employees, engaged in a pattern and

18 practice of unlawful aiding and abetting of harassment, discrimination, and retaliation, in

19 violation of the California Fair Employment and Housing Act ( FEHA ), Cal. Gov. Code §

20 12940(i).

21

53. Defendant, its agents, servants and/or employees, attempted to and

22 did in fact, aid, abet, incite, compel and/or coerce their agents, servants and/or employees to

23 engage in unlawful sexual harassment, sex and/or gender discrimination, and retaliation against

24 the Plaintiff, as alleged above.

25

54. As a direct and proximate result of the aforesaid harassment based on sex,

26 plaintiff URQUIZO sustained injury in the form of severe emotional distress, humiliation,

27 embarrassment, and mental anguish, all to her damage in amounts to be established at trial.

28

Plaintiff/Intervenor s Complaint for

Damages and Demand for Jury Trial

9

Case 5:02-cv-04614-JF Document 18 Filed 04/23/2003 Page 10 of 12

1

55. Defendant s acts were wanton, willful and intentional with malicious

2 and reckless disregard for the rights and sensibilities of Plaintiff.

3

WHEREFORE, Plaintiff URQUIZO requests relief as hereinafter provided.

4

SEVENTH CLAIM FOR RELIEF

(HOSTILE WORK ENVIRONMENT SEXUAL HARASSMENT)

5

(CALIFORNIA GOVERNMENT CODE § 12940(j))

6

56. Plaintiff hereby incorporates by reference paragraphs 1 through 55 of this

7 complaint as if fully set forth herein.

8

57. Defendant subjected Plaintiff to unwelcome sexual advances, comments, and

9 degrading and humiliating conduct as described above. Defendant s aforesaid unwelcome sexual

10 comments and acts were so severe or pervasive that they created a continuing hostile work

11 environment.

12

58. Defendant FRESH EXPRESS INC. failed to prevent sexual harassment by failing

13 to investigate, stop or prevent the incidents of sexual harassment even after Plaintiff gave notice

14 of such incidents.

15

59. As a direct and proximate result of the aforesaid harassment based on sex,

16 plaintiff URQUIZO has sustained injury in the form of severe emotional distress, humiliation,

17 embarrassment, and mental anguish, all to their damage in amounts to be established at trial.

18

WHEREFORE, Plaintiff URQUIZO requests relief as hereinafter provided.

19

EIGHTH CLAIM FOR RELIEF

FAILURE TO PREVENT DISCRIMINATION AND HARASSMENT

20

(CAL. GOV. CODE § 12940(k))

21

60. Plaintiff hereby incorporates by reference paragraphs 1 through 59 of this

22 complaint as if fully set forth herein.

23

61. In perpetrating the above described actions and omissions, Defendant FRESH

24 EXPRESS INC., as employer, its agents, servants and/or employees, engaged in a pattern and

25 practice of failing to prevent discrimination and harassment, in violation of the California Fair

26 Employment and Housing Act ( FEHA ), Cal. Gov. Code § 12940(k).

27

62. In violation of Cal. Gov. Code § 12940(i), Defendant, their agents, servants

28

Plaintiff/Intervenor s Complaint for

Damages and Demand for Jury Trial

10

Case 5:02-cv-04614-JF Document 18 Filed 04/23/2003 Page 11 of 12

1 and/or employees, failed to take all reasonable steps necessary to prevent sex and/or gender

2 discrimination and sexual harassment from occurring, including, among other things, failure to

3 implement an effective policy against sexual harassment and/or an effective means of remedying

4 such harassment.

5

63. Defendant, its agents, servants and/or employees, knew or should have known

6 of Defendant s failure to take all reasonable steps necessary to prevent sex and/or gender

7 discrimination and sexual harassment from occurring. Defendant, its agents, servants and/or

8 employees did not take all reasonable steps to prevent retaliation from occurring, and failed to

9 take immediate and appropriate corrective action.

10

64. Defendant FRESH EXPRESS INC. participated in creating and maintaining the

11 hostile work environment and failed to investigate, stop or prevent the incidents of sexual

12 harassment even after Plaintiff gave notice of such incidents.

13

65. As a direct and proximate result of the aforesaid harassment based on sex,

14 Plaintiff URQUIZO has sustained injury in the form of severe emotional distress, humiliation,

15 embarrassment, and mental anguish, all to her damage in amounts to be established at trial.

16

66. Defendant s aforesaid acts of harassment were wanton, willful and intentional

17 with malicious and reckless disregard for the rights and sensibilities of Plaintiff.

18

WHEREFORE, Plaintiff requests relief as hereinafter provided.

19 WHEREFORE, Plaintiff prays for judgment against Defendant as follows:

20

A. For compensatory damages according to proof, including but not limited to lost

21 wages, damages for emotional distress, including but not limited to humiliation, grief, and

22 anguish;

23

B. For punitive damages;

24

C. For injunctive relief to enjoin Defendant from engaging in unlawful activity

25 alleged herein;

26

D. For declaratory relief;

27

E. For costs of suit;

28

Plaintiff/Intervenor s Complaint for

Damages and Demand for Jury Trial

11

Case 5:02-cv-04614-JF Document 18 Filed 04/23/2003 Page 12 of 12

1

F. For such other relief as the Court deems proper.

2

DEMAND FOR JURY TRIAL

3

Plaintiff hereby demands a jury trial as provided by Rule 38(a) of the Federal Rules of

4 Civil Procedure.

5 DATED: October 15, 2002
6

CALIFORNIA RURAL LEGAL ASSISTANCE, INC.

7

By: _________________________________

8

MICHAEL MEUTER

Attorneys for Plaintiff

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

Plaintiff/Intervenor s Complaint for

Damages and Demand for Jury Trial

12

 
 ,
Case 5:02-cv-04614-JF Document 33 Filed 05/12/2004 Page 1 of 9

1

WILLIAM R. TAMAYO (CA Bar No. 084965)

JONATHAN T. PECK (VA Bar No. 12303)

2

EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY COMMISSION

350 The Embarcadero, Suite 500

3

San Francisco, CA 94105

Telephone No. (415) 625-5646 and Fax No. (415) 625-5657

4

LUCILA G. ROSAS (CA Bar No. 187345)

5

EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY COMMISSION

96 North Third Street, Suite 200

6

San Jose, CA 95112

Telephone No. (408) 291-6401 and Fax No. (408) 291-4539

7

Attorneys for Plaintiff

8

9

10 B. JAMES FITZPATRICK, ESQ. (CA State BarNo. 129056)
CHARLES SWANSTON, ESQ. (CA State Bar No. 181882) 11 FITZPATRICK, SPINI & SWANSTON
838 South Main Street, Suite D 12 Salinas, CA 93901
Telephone No. (831) 755-1311 13 Facsimile No. (831) 755-1319

14 Attorneys for Defendant

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

15

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

16

SAN JOSE DIVISION

17

EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY ~

CIVIL ACTION NO.

18 COMMISSION,

)

19

Plaintiff,

) C-02-4614 JF (HRL)
)

20 ARMIDA URQUIZO,

)
) CONSENT DECREE

)

21

Plaintiff/Intervenor,

)

22

v.

)
)

)

23 FRESH EXPRESS, INC.,

)

24 ----------D-e-fe-n-da-n-t.------------))
25 I. INTRODUCTION

26 On September 24, 2002, Plaintiff, Equal Employment Opportunity Commission

27

ursuant to Title VII 91' the Civil Rights Act of 1964 ("Title VII")

28

Consent Decree C-02-4614 JF (HRL)
1

Case 5:02-cv-04614-JF Document 33 Filed 05/12/2004 Page 2 of 9

1 and Title I of the Civil Rights Act of 1991. Plaintiff alleged that Defendant subjected ARMIDA

2 URQUIZO to a hostile work environment and to retaliation after she complained of sexual

3

harassment.

4

On November 12,2002, Ms. Urquizo was granted intervention in the EEOC action.

5 Intervenor has settled her claims in a separate confidential agreement to which the EEOC is not

6 a party.

7

On April 2, 2003, Defendant FRESH EXPRESS, INC. ( Defendant) answered the

8 complaint and denied liability on all claims.

9

The EEOC and Defendant want to conclude fully and finally all claims arising out of the

10 above action without the expenditure of further resources and expenses in contested litigation.

11 They enter into this Consent Decree to further the objectives of equal employment opportunity as

12 set forth in Title VII.

13

II. NON-ADMISSION OF LIABILITY

14

This Consent Decree is not an adjudication or finding on the merits ofthis case and shall not

15 be construed as an admission of a violation by Defendant.

16

The Court has reviewed the terms ofthis Consent Decree in light ofthe pleadings, the record

17 herein, and the applicable law, and now approves the Consent Decree in its entirety.

18

Therefore, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED, ADJUDGED AND DECREED as follows:

19

III. GENERAL PROVISIONS

20

1. This Court has jurisdiction over the subject matter and the parties to this action.

21

2. This Consent Decree constitutes a full resolution of Plaintiffs complaint in Civil

22 Action No. C-02-4614 JF (HRL) and the underlying charge of discrimination filed with the

23 EEOC.

24

3. This Consent Decree shall become effective upon its entry by the Court.

25

4. Each party shall bear its own costs and attorney fees.

26

IV. INJUNCTIVE RELIEF

27

1. Sexual Harassment: Consistent with Section 703 of Title VII, 42 U.S.c. §2000e-2,

28 Defendant, its officers, agents, management (including supervisory employees), successors and

Consent Decree C-02-4614 JF (HRL)
2

Case 5:02-cv-04614-JF Document 33 Filed 05/12/2004 Page 3 of 9

1 assigns, and all those in active concert or participation with them, will make every effort to

2

comply with all requirements of Title VII with respect to providing a work environment free

3

from discrimination on the basis of sex and free from any action, policy or practice that is

4

intended to or known to them to have the effect of harassing or intimidating any female

5

employee on the basis of her gender or creating, facilitating or permitting the existence of a work

6

environment that is hostile to female employees.

7

2. Retaliation: Consistent with Section 704 of Title VII, 42 U.S.C. §2000e-3, Defendant,

8 its officers, agents, management (including supervisory employees), successors or assigns, and

9 all those in active concert or participation with them, agree not to engage in, implement or permit

10 any action, policy or practice with the purpose of retaliating against Armida Urquizo or any 11 person who was identified as a possible witness in this action because they opposed any practice 12 of harassment or other discriminatory acts on the basis of gender made unlawful under Title VII; 13 filed a Charge of Discrimination alleging any such practice; or testified or participated in any 14 manner in any investigation (including, without limitation, any internal investigation undertaken

15 by Defendant), proceeding or hearing in connection with this case.

16

17

V. OTHER RELIEF

18

1. Defendant affirms the following "Statement of Zero-Tolerance Policy and Equality

19 Objectives":

20

Defendant is firmly committed to maintaining a zero-tolerance

policy concerning sexual harassment and retaliation against

21

individuals who report harassment in the company's workplace; to

swiftly and firmly responding to any acts of sexual harassment and

22

retaliation of which the company becomes aware; to implementing

a disciplinary system that is designed to strongly deter future acts

23

of sexual harassment or retaliation; and to actively monitoring its

workplace in order to ensure tolerance, respect and dignity for all

24

people.

25

This paragraph does not create any contractual causes of action or other rights that would

26 not otherwise exist.

27

2. In order to accomplish the objectives embodied in the Statement of Zero-Tolerance

28 Policy and Equality Objectives and this Consent Decree, Defendant shall administer the

Consent Decree C-02-4614 JF (HRL)
3

Case 5:02-cv-04614-JF Document 33 Filed 05/12/2004 Page 4 of 9

1 following policies and procedures:

2

(a) Policy Addressing Sexual Harassment: Defendant agrees that it will

3

continue to administer its sexual harassment policy which: (i) includes definitions of

4

sexual harassment with examples to supplement the definitions of sexual harassment and

5

provides for substantial and progressive discipline for incidents of sexual harassment; (ii)

6

includes strong non-retaliation language with examples to supplement the definition of

7

retaliation, and provides for substantial and progressive discipline for incidents of

8

retaliation; (iii) provides that complaints of sexual harassment and/or retaliation will be

9

accepted by Defendant both in writing and orally; (iv) provides a timetable for

10

commencing an investigation after a complaint is made or received and for remedial

11

action to be taken upon conclusion of an investigation; and (v) indicates that, promptly

12

upon the conclusion of its investigation ofa complaint, Defendant will communicate to

13

the complaining party the results of the investigation and the remedial actions taken or

14

proposed, if any.

15

Defendant's policy will be written in both Spanish and English. Defendant will

16

provide a copy of the sexual harassment policy to the EEOC within forty-five (45) days

17

of the signing of the Consent Decree.

18

(b) Complaint Procedures: Defendant's complaint procedure is designed to

19

encourage employees to come forward with complaints about violations of its harassment

20

policy. Defendant provides its employees with convenient, confidential and reliable

21

mechanisms for reporting incidents of sexual harassment and retaliation. Defendant shall

22

designate at least two employees with the responsibility for investigating such issues as

23

contact persons. The names of the contact persons, their work locations, and telephone

24

numbers shall be listed on the harassment policy and also shall be routinely and

25

continuously posted in a prominent place at all of Defendant's business locations.

26

Defendant's complaint procedure will also be written in both Spanish and

27

English. Defendant will provide a copy of the complaint procedures to the EEOC within

28

forty-five (45) days of the signing of the Consent Decree.

Consent Decree C-02-4614 JF (HRL)
4

Case 5:02-cv-04614-JF Document 33 Filed 05/12/2004 Page 5 of 9

1

(c) Supervisor Accountability:

2

(i) Defendant agrees that it shall impose substantial discipline up to and

3

including tennination, suspension without payor demotion - upon any supervisor or

4

manager who engages in harassment on the basis of sex or pennits any such conduct to

5

occur in his or her work area or among employees under his or her supervision, or who

6

retaliates against any person who complains or participates in any investigation or

7

proceeding concerning any such harassment. Defendant shall communicate this policy to

8

all supervisors and managers at the time the person is hired or promoted to

9

supervisor/manager and subsequently, on an annual basis.

10

(ii) Defendant agrees that it shall advise all managers and supervisors of their duty

11

to actively monitor their work areas to ensure employee compliance with the company's

12

harassment policy, and to report any incidents and/or complaints of sexual harassment

13

and/or retaliation of which they become aware to the department charged with handling

14

such complaints.

15

(d) Sexual Harassment Training:

16

(i) Prior to the execution of this Consent Decree, Defendant has provided all of its

17

employees with one hour of mandatory sexual harassment training. Defendant reaffinns

18

its commitment to provide on an annual basis at least one hour of mandatory sexual

19

harassment training, the cost ofwhich shall be borne by Defendant. The training has and

20

will be conducted in the appropriate language (i.e., Spanish or English) depending on the

21

primary language of the employees being trained.

22

(ii) The training described in the preceding paragraph shall be provided by a

23

person knowledgeable in sexual harassment who has and shall educate the employees

24

about the problems of sexual harassment in the workplace. The training has and will

25

include examples of the types of remarks and behavior that will not be tolerated in

26

Defendant's business locations. The training has and will further infonn each participant

27

that he or she is responsible for knowing and complying with the contents of Defendant's

28

harassment policy.

Consent Decree C-02-4614 JF (HRL)
5

Case 5:02-cv-04614-JF Document 33 Filed 05/12/2004 Page 6 of 9

1

(iii) Supervisors and/or managers who are responsible for enforcing Defendant's

2

harassment policy have and shall also receive training on appropriate techniques for

3

investigating harassment and remedying it. The training on investigative techniques is

4

included as a component of the mandatory sexual harassment training.

5

(iv) Upon execution of the Consent Decree, Defendant shall provide to the EEOC,

6

a copy ofthe course syllabus being used for the training. Following future training

7

session, Defendant shall continue to provide the participants with a questionnaire

8

through which they will be asked to critique the training and to provide suggestions to

9

improve future trainings.

10

(v) Defendant will continue to retain records of the training programs, listing the

11

dates on which it held the training and identifying the persons who attended and those

12

who did not attend. Defendant will provide a copy of these records, the training materials

13

and the completed post-training questionnaires to the Commission within thirty (30) days

14

upon receiving such a request.

15

(vi) Defendant will continue to administer the training sessions for all its employees on

16 an annual basis until the expiration of the Consent Decree. Upon request, Defendant shall send 17 to the EEOC documentation confirming that such training is taking place.

18

VI. REPORTING

19

1. Defendant will conspicuously post the notice, a copy of which is attached as Exhibit 1,

20 at its business locations. Such notices shall be posted for six (6) months following entry ofthe

21 Consent Decree. Defendant will monitor the notices and replace within ten (10) days any notice

22 which is defaced or removed.

23

24

2. Defendant shall submit a final report to the EEOC thirty (30) days before the Consent

25 Decree expires containing a statement verifying its compliance with the terms of the Consent

26 Decree.

27

VII. RETENTION OF JURISDICTION AND

28

EXPIRATION OF CONSENT DECREE

Consent Decree C-02-4614 JF (HRL)
6

Case 5:02-cv-04614-JF Document 33 Filed 05/12/2004 Page 7 of 9

1

1. This Consent Decree shall terminate three years from the date of entry by the court,

2

unless EEOC petitions this court for an extension of the Decree because of noncompliance by

3

Defendant. If EEOC determines that Defendant has not complied with the Consent Decree,

4

EEOC will provide written notification of the alleged breach to Defendant and will not petition

5

the Court for enforcement sooner than thirty (30) days after providing written notification. The

6

thirty-day period following written notice shall be used by the parties for good faith efforts to

7

resolve the issue. If EEOC petitions the court and the court finds Defendant to be in substantial

8

violation of the terms of the Decree, the court may extend this Consent Decree///

9

2. This Court shall retain jurisdiction over this action for the purposes of enforcing the

10 provisions of this Consent Decree.
11 On behalf of Plaintiff:
12
13

//7\

,

\

On bfa1f}f Defendant: , ,
11 /I

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22 IT IS SO ORDERED:
23

24

25 DATED:
26
27

Honorable Jeremy F
~TEDSTATES1~~~~~DuGE

28

Consent Decree C-02-4614 JF (HRL)
7

Case 5:02-cv-04614-JF Document 33 Filed 05/12/2004 Page 8 of 9

1

2

3

4

5

6

NOTICE TO EMPLOYEES

7

This notice is being posted as part of a consent decree entered into between the U.S.

8

Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) and Fresh Express, Inc.

9

Federal law requires that there be no discrimination against any employee or applicant

for employment because of the individual's race, color, religion, sex, national origin, age

10 (40 and over), or disability with respect to hiring, promotion, firing, compensation,

sexual harassment or other terms and conditions or privileges of employment.

11

Federal law also prohibits retaliation against any employee who files a charge of

12 discrimination or who cooperates with the EEOC's investigation of a charge. The

EEOC is committed to protecting employees who file charges or who are witnesses

13 during an investigation including, if necessary, further court proceedings.

14 It is the policy of Fresh Express, Inc. that it will not retaliate or tolerate retaliation in any way against any employee who has filed a charge or provided testimony in the course
15 of an investigation.
16 It is also the policy of Fresh Express, Inc. that discrimination will not be tolerated. This policy includes the fair treatment of all employees and the maintenance of a work
17 environment free of discrimination, including sexual harassment. If any employee is found in violation of this policy, he/she will be subjected to disciplinary action, up to and
18 including dismissal.
19 If you wish to report an instance(s) of discrimination, please contact Elaine Hunt, Director of Human Resources You may also contact the U.S. Equal Employment
20 Opportunity Commission (EEOC) at 408-291-7352 and/or the Department of Fair Employment and Housing (DFEH) at (800) 884-1684.
21 This Notice will remain posted for six months from the date of posting and will not be
22 defaced.

23

24

25

26

27
28

Consent Decree C-02-4614 JF (HRL)
8

Case 5:02-cv-04614-JF Document 33 Filed 05/12/2004 Page 9 of 9

1

2

3

4 AVISO A EMPLEADOS
5

6 Este Aviso es anunciado como parte del remedio acordado conforme al acuerdo entre la Comision de Igualdad de Oportunidades de Empleo (EEOC) y Fresh Express, Inc.

7

La ley federal requiere que no aiga discriminacion contra cualquier empleado 0

8

solicitante para empleo a causa de su raza, color, religion, sexo, origen nacional, edad

(40 arios 0 mayores), e incapacidades con respecto a contratacion, promocion,

9

despido, compensacion, u otros terminos, condiciones 0 privilegios de empleo.

10 La ley federal tambien prohibe represalias contra cualquier empleado que presente una denuncia de discriminacion 0 quienes cooperan con la EEOC en una investigacion de
11 una denuncia. La EEOC esta comprometlda a proteger empleados que presenten una denuncia, guienes se quejan sobre discriminacion 0 quienes son testigos durante una
12 investigacion incluyendo, si es necesario, durante un juicio.

13 Es la paliza de Fresh Express, Inc., que no tomara represalias ni tolara represalias de cualquier forma contra ningun empleado que se aiga quejado, presentado una
14 denuncia,o proporcionado testimonio durante el transcurso de una investigacion.

15 Tambien es la poliza de Fresh Express, Inc., de prohibir discriminacion en el empleo. Esta poliza incluye el tratamiento justo de todos los empleados y de mantener un
16 ambiente en el trabajo libre de discriminacion, incluyendo acoso sexual. Si se determina que algun empleado/a ha violado esta poliza, el/ella sera sujeto a una accion
17 disciplinaria, incluyendo terminacion.

18 Si desea reportar un incidente de discriminacion, por favor comuniquese con
19 Elaine Hunt, Director, Human Resources. Tambilm se puede comunicar con la EEOC al (408) 291-7352 0 la agencia estatal DFEH al (800) 884-1684.
20 Este aviso se mantendra anunciado par seis meses de la fecha del anuncio y no sera
21 estropeado.
22

23 Fecha
24

25
26

27 EXHIBIT 1
28

Consent Decree C-02-4614 JF (HRL)
9

 
 CAND-ECF - Docket Report

Page 1 of 5

ADRMOP, CLOSED, E-Filing
U.S. District Court California Northern District (San Jose) CIVIL DOCKET FOR CASE #: 5:02-cv-04614-JF

U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission et al v. Fresh Express, Inc. Assigned to: Hon. Jeremy Fogel Referred to: Magistrate Judge Howard R. Lloyd Cause: 42:2000e Job Discrimination (Employment)

Date Filed: 09/24/2002 Jury Demand: Both Nature of Suit: 442 Civil Rights: Jobs Jurisdiction: U.S. Government Plaintiff

Plaintiff
U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission

represented by Jonathan T. Peck U.S. EEOC 350 Embarcadero Street Suite 500 San Francisco, CA 94105-1687 415/625-5600 Fax: 415-625-5657 Email: Jonathan.Peck@eeoc.gov LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

Lucila G. Rosas U.S. EEOC 96 North Third Street Suite 200 San Jose, CA 95112 (408) 291-6401 Email: Lucila.Rosas@eeoc.gov LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

William Robert Tamayo U.S. EEOC 350 Embarcadero Street Suite 500 San Francisco, CA 94105-1687 415-625-5645 Fax: 415-625-5657 Email: william.tamayo@eeoc.gov ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

V. Intervenor Pla Armida Urquizo

represented by Michael Meuter

https://ecf.cand.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/DktRpt.pl?105515916966809-L_923_0-1

5/17/2007

CAND-ECF - Docket Report

Page 2 of 5

V. Defendant Fresh Express, Inc.

California Rural Legal Assistance Inc 3 Williams Road Salinas, CA 93905 831-757-5221 Fax: 831-757-6212 Email: mmeuter@crla.org LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
represented by Charles Swanston Fitzpatrick Spini & Swanston Attorneys at Law 838 South Main Street, Suite E Salinas, CA 93901 831-755-1311 Fax: 831-755-1319 Email: cswanston@fandslegal.com ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

Date Filed 09/24/2002
09/24/2002 09/24/2002 10/15/2002
10/15/2002
11/07/2002

#

Docket Text

1 COMPLAINT summons issued; jury demand; against Fresh Express, Inc. (). Filed by U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission. (bw, ) Additional attachment(s) added on 10/2/2002 (lfc, ). (Entered: 09/26/2002)

2 ADR SCHEDULING ORDER: Case Management Statement due by 1/14/2003. Case Management Conference set for 1/21/2003 at 01:30 PM. (bw, ) (Entered: 09/26/2002)

Summons Issued as to Fresh Express, Inc. (bw, ) (Entered: 09/26/2002)

3 INCOMPLETE SUBMISSION. PLEASE SEE ENTRY #4; MOTION to Intervene filed by Mike Meuter California Rural Legal Assistance. Motion Hearing set for 11/19/2002 10:00 AM. (Meuter, Michael) Modified on 10/15/2002 (WV) (Entered: 10/15/2002)

4 MOTION to Intervene Notice of Motion and Motion For Leave to Intervene filed by Mike Meuter California Rural Legal Assistance. Motion Hearing set for 11/19/2002 10:00 AM. (Attachments: # 1 # 2 Declaration of Michael Meuter in Support# 3 # 4 Proof of Service 1) Notice of Motion; Memo of P&A; Dec. of M. Meuter in Support ; Complaint in Intervention)(Meuter, Michael) (Entered: 10/15/2002)

5 Statement of Non-Opposition re 4 filed by U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission. (Related document(s)4) (Rosas, Lucila) (Entered: 11/07/2002)

https://ecf.cand.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/DktRpt.pl?105515916966809-L_923_0-1

5/17/2007

CAND-ECF - Docket Report

Page 3 of 5

11/07/2002 11/12/2002 11/26/2002 11/26/2002 12/02/2002 12/03/2002
01/21/2003 01/23/2003
03/17/2003 03/17/2003
03/18/2003 04/16/2003 04/23/2003 05/12/2003

6 CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE by U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission re 5 Statement of Non-Opposition (Rosas, Lucila) (Entered: 11/07/2002)
7 ORDER by Magistrate Judge Howard R. Lloyd granting 4 Motion to Intervene (hrllc2) (Entered: 11/12/2002)
8 Declination to Proceed Before a U.S. Magistrate Judge by U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission. (Rosas, Lucila) (Entered: 11/26/2002)
9 CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE by U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission re 8 Declination to Proceed Before a U.S. Magistrate (Rosas, Lucila) (Entered: 11/26/2002)
10 CLERK'S NOTICE of Impending Reassignment to U.S. District Judge (pmc, ) (Entered: 12/02/2002)
11 ORDER REASSIGNING CASE. Case reassigned to Judge Jeremy Fogel as the presiding judge. Magistrate Judge Howard R. Lloyd remains as the referral judge.. Signed by Executive Committee on 12/03/02. (lfc, ) (Entered: 12/03/2002)
12 STIPULATION and Order for Eight Week Continuance of Case Management Conference by U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission. (Rosas, Lucila) (Entered: 01/21/2003)
13 STIPULATION AND ORDER CONTINUING CASE MANAGEMENT CONFERENCE Case Management Conference set for 3/24/2003 at 10:30 AM.Signed by Judge Jeremy Fogel on 1/22/03. (jfsec) (Entered: 01/23/2003)
14 STIPULATION and Order for Eight Week Continuance of Case Management Conference by U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission. (Rosas, Lucila) (Entered: 03/17/2003)
15 CERTIFICATE/PROOF OF SERVICE by U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission re 14 Stipulation and Order for Eight Week Continuance of Case Management Conference (Rosas, Lucila) (Entered: 03/17/2003)
16 STIPULATION AND ORDER FOR EIGHT WEEK CONTINUANCE OF CASE MANAGEMENT CONFERENCE. re 14 Signed by Judge Jeremy Fogel on 3/18/03. (jfsec) (Entered: 03/18/2003)
17 ANSWER to Complaint by Fresh Express, Inc.. (Swanston, Charles) (Entered: 04/16/2003)
18 First Intervenor COMPLAINT. Filed by Armida Urquizo. (Meuter, Michael) (Entered: 04/23/2003)
19 JOINT CASE MANAGEMENT STATEMENT and [Proposed] Order filed by U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission. (Rosas, Lucila) (Entered: 05/12/2003)

https://ecf.cand.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/DktRpt.pl?105515916966809-L_923_0-1

5/17/2007

CAND-ECF - Docket Report

Page 4 of 5

05/20/2003
09/16/2003 10/27/2003 10/29/2003 10/30/2003 11/03/2003
12/08/2003 12/10/2003 12/11/2003 12/15/2003 12/16/2003
12/23/2003 05/07/2004

20 Minute Entry: Initial Case Management Conference held on 5/19/2003 before Judge Jeremy Fogel. Court adopts the proposed case management dates. Case set for Jury trial on 8/30/04 at 1:30 p.m. and Pretrial conference on 8/20/04 at 9:30 a.m. Continued to 11/3/03 at 10:30 a.m. for Further Case Management conference. (Court Reporter Not reported.) (dlm, ) (Entered: 05/20/2003)
21 ANSWER to Intervenor Complaint by Fresh Express, Inc.. (Swanston, Charles) (Entered: 09/16/2003)
22 STIPULATION and Order for Six Week Continuance of Case Management Conference by U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission. (Rosas, Lucila) (Entered: 10/27/2003)
23 CLERK'S NOTICE Case Management Conference rescheduled for 12/15/2003 at 10:30 AM. (jfsec, COURT STAFF) (Entered: 10/29/2003)
24 NOTICE of Change of Address of William Tamayo and Jonathan Peck by U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission. (Rosas, Lucila) (Entered: 10/30/2003)
25 STIPULATION AND ORDER CONTINUING CASE MANAGEMENT CONFERENCE Case Management Conference set for 12/15/2003 at 10:30 AM.. Signed by Judge Jeremy Fogel on 11/3/03. (jfsec, COURT STAFF) (Entered: 11/03/2003)
26 CASE MANAGEMENT STATEMENT filed by Armida Urquizo. (Meuter, Michael) (Filed on 12/8/2003) (Entered: 12/08/2003)
27 CASE MANAGEMENT STATEMENT filed by Fresh Express, Inc.. (Swanston, Charles) (Filed on 12/10/2003) (Entered: 12/10/2003)
28 CASE MANAGEMENT STATEMENT filed by Fresh Express, Inc.. (Swanston, Charles) (Filed on 12/11/2003) (Entered: 12/11/2003)
29 CLERK'S NOTICE of Settlement Conference and Order Settlement Conference set for 12/23/2003 09:30 AM.before Magistrate Judge Howard R. Lloyd (pmc, ) (Filed on 12/15/2003) (Entered: 12/15/2003)
30 Minute Entry: Further Case Management Conference held on 12/15/2003 before Judge Jeremy Fogel (Date Filed: 12/16/2003). Case referred to Magistrate Judge Howard R. Lloyd for settlement conference. Case remains set for jury trial on 8/30/04 at 1:30 p.m. and pretrial conference on 8/20/04 at 9:30 a.m. (Court Reporter Not reported.) (dlm, COURT STAFF) (Date Filed: 12/16/2003) (Entered: 12/16/2003)
31 Minute Entry: Settlement Conference (Date Filed: 12/23/2003). (Tape #n/a.) (pmc, ) (Date Filed: 12/23/2003) (Entered: 12/23/2003)
34 Proposed Consent Decress by Fresh Express, Inc., U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission. (dhm, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 5/7/2004) Additional attachment(s) added on 5/13/2004 (dhm, COURT STAFF). (Entered: 05/10/2004)

https://ecf.cand.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/DktRpt.pl?105515916966809-L_923_0-1

5/17/2007

CAND-ECF - Docket Report

Page 5 of 5

05/07/2004 05/12/2004

32 CLERK'S NOTICE re: Failure to E-File and/or Failure to Register as an E-Filer (regarding proposed consent decree manually submitted on 5/7/04) (dhm, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 5/7/2004) (Entered: 05/10/2004)
33 CONSENT DECREE filed by Fresh Express, Inc., U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission. Signed by Judge Jeremy Fogel on 5/10/04. (dlm, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 5/12/2004) (Entered: 05/12/2004)

PACER Service Center
Transaction Receipt

05/17/2007 14:53:33

PACER Login: hs0328

Client Code: eeoc

Description: Docket Report Search Criteria: 5:02-cv-04614-JF

Billable Pages: 3

Cost:

0.24

https://ecf.cand.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/DktRpt.pl?105515916966809-L_923_0-1

5/17/2007