IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT~ouUthneitrendD~istatrteicstCoof uTretxsa~

FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS

FILED

HOUSTON DIVISION

2005

EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY COMMISSION,

~ K, Mllby, Clerk of Court

Plaintiff,

CIVIL ACTION NO.

Vo
GEOSCIENCE ENGINEERING & TESTING INC.

05-.336
JURY TRIAL DEMANDED

Defendant.

COMPLAINT

This is an action under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, as amended, by Title I of the Civil Rights Act of 1991, to correct unlawful employment discrimination on the basis of sex and to provide appropriate relief to Michele M. Galvan ("Galvan")and other females, as a class of female employees, including but not limited to Cynthia Perez, who were adversely affected by the unlawful practices of Defendant Geoscience Engineering & Testing, Inc. ("Defendant"). Since at least 2003, Defendant has subjected Ms. Galvan, as well as other female employees, to unwelcome comments and or touching of a sexual nature and constructive discharge of some of them because of their sex, female.
JURISDICTION AND VENUE 1. Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §§451, 1331, 1337, 1343 and 1345, the United States District Court has jurisdiction over the subject matter of this civil action. This action is authorized and instituted pursuant to Section 706(f)(1) and (3) of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, as

amended, 42 U.S.C. § 2000e, et seq. ("Title VII"), and Section 102 of the Civil Rights Act of 1991, 42 U.S.C. § 1981a.
2. The unlawful employment practices alleged in this complaint were and are now being committed within the jurisdiction of the,United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas, Houston Division. Venue is appropriate in this court.
PARTIES 3. Plaintiff, the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission ("EEOC" or "Commission"), is the agency of the United States of America charged with the administration, interpretation and enforcement of Title VII, and is expressly authorized to bring this action by Section 706(0(1) and (3) of Title VII, 42 U.S.C. § 2000(e)-5(f)(1) and (3). 4. Defendant is a corporation doing business in the State of Texas and the City of Houston, and has continuously had at least fifteen (15) employees. 5. At all relevant times, Defendant has continuously been doing business in the State of Texas and the City of Houston and has continuously had at least fifteen employees. Defendant may be served with process by serving its registered agent in Texas, Jim A. Palavan, 405 East 20th Street, Houston, Texas 77008. 6. At all relevant times, Defendant has continuously been an employer engaged in an industry affecting commerce within the meaning of Sections 701(b), (g) and (h) of Title VII, 42 U.S.C. §§ 2000e(b), (g) and (h).
STATEMENT OF CLAIMS More than thirty days prior to the institution of this lawsuit, Ms. Galvan filed a charge
,2

with the Commission alleging violations of Title VII by Defendant. All conditions precedent to the institution of this lawsuit have been fulfilled, including the filing of a timely charge of employment discrimination, and an attempt to conciliate the matter.
8. Since at least 2003, Defendant engaged in unlawful employment practices, in violation of Section 703(a)(1) of Title VII, 42 U.S.C. § 2000e-2(a)(1), at its Houston location.
9. Since at least 2003, Defendant’s owner, Jim A. Palavan, has subjected Ms. Galvan and other female employees, including but not limited to Cynthia Perez, to unwelcome comments and or touching of a sexual nahare because of their sex, female. The conduct included sexual propositions and or attempting to hug or kiss them. The female employees had no avenue to complain within the company and many worked only a few weeks or a few months before being forced to resign because of the sexual harassment.
10. From about May 2003, Ms. Galvan was subjected to sexual harassment by Mr. Palavan, who often laughed when she protested and asked him to stop the unlawful conduct.
11. When Ms. Galvan complained to Defendant’s management about the sexual harassment, she was told to keep quiet.
12. When the harassment escalated by Mr. Palavan attempting to hug and kiss her, Ms. Galvan was forced to resign.
13. Defendant had no written sexual harassment policy and complaint procedure available to employees, even though Defendant had previously been required to establish such a policy and procedure under a consent decree with the Commission entered on April 3, 1998, to resolve Civil Action No. H-96-3020.
14. Defendant took no steps to stop the sexual harassment of Ms. Galvan and or of other

female employees, even though Defendant had previously been required to provide training to its employees and owner pursuant to the consent decree with the Commission entered on April 3, 1998, to resolve Civil Action No. H-96-3020.
15. The effect of the practices complained of in the preceding paragraphs has been to deprive Ms. Galvan and other female employees, including but not limited to Cynthia Perez, of equal employment opportunities and otherwise adversely affect their status as employees because of their sex, female.
16. The unlawful employment practices of which the Commission complains in the preceding paragraphs were and are intentional.
17. The unlawful employment practices complained of in the preceding paragraphs were and are done with malice or reckless indifference to the federally protected rights of Ms. Galvan and other female employees as a class, including but not limited to Cynthia Perez.
PRAYER FOR RELIEF 18. Wherefore, the Commission respectfully requests that this Court: A. Grant a permanent injunction enjoining Defendant, its officers, successors, assigns,
and all persons in active concert or participation with it, from engaging in any employment practice which discriminates on the basis of sex; B. Grant a permanent injunction enjoining Defendant, its officers, successors, assigns, and all persons in active concert or participation with it, from engaging in any unlawful retaliation against individuals who oppose employment practices reasonably believed to be unlawful under Title VII, or against individuals who assist, encourage, and/or support others who oppose employment practices reasonably believed to be
4

unlawful under Title VII;

Co

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

provide equal employment opportunities for employees regardless of their sex, and

which eradicate the effects of its past and present unlawful employment practices;

Do

Order Defendant, to make whole Michele M. Galvan and a class of female

employees, including but not limited to Cynthia Perez, by providing appropriate back

pay with prejudgment interest, in amounts to be proved at trial, and other affirmative

relief necessary to eradicate the effects of unlawful employment practices, including

but not limited to reinstatement, or, in the alternative, to provide front pay;

Eo

Order Defendant to make whole Michaele M. Galvan and a class of female

employees, including but not limited to Cynthia Perez ,by providing compensation

for past and future pecuniary losses resulting from the unlawful employment

practices described in the preceding paragraphs;

Fo

Order Defendant to make whole Michele M. Galvan and a class of female employees,

including but not limited to Cynthia Perez, by providing compensation for past and

future nonpecuniary losses resulting from the unlawful employment practices

described in the preceding paragraphs, including emotional pain, inconvenience, and

humiliation, in amounts to be determined at trail;

Go

Order Defendant, to pay Michele M. Galvan and a class of female employees,

including but not limited to Cynthia Perez, punitive damages for its malicious and

reckless conduct, as described above, in an amount to be determined at trial;

Ho

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

5

interest;
I. Award the Commission its costs of this action.
JURY TRIAL DEMAND
The Commission requests a jury trial on all questions of fact raised by its complaint.
Respectfully submitted,
EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY COMMISSION
JAMES L. LEE Deputy General Counsel
GWENDOLYN YOUNG REAMS Associate General Counsel 1801 L. Street, N.W. Washington, D.C. 20507
Sacher \ xRe)gHb uis~; a2 ~i sttS2s ~) ffic e
1919 Smith Street, 7th Floor Houston, Texas 77002-8049 (713) 209-3398
Attorney-in-Charge Ohio Bar No. 0024652 Southern District I.D. No. 10541 Houston District Office 1919 Smith Street, 7th Floor Houston, Texas 77002-8049 (713) 209-3404 Fax: (713) 209-3402

JS 44

(Rev. The JS

07/89) 44 civil cover

sheet

and

the

information

contained

herein

neither

rOeplace

nor

supplement

CIVIL the filing and

COVER SItEET service of pleadlngs or other

papers

~-required

by

law,

except

as

provided

by

local

rules

of

court.

This

fom~,

approved by the Judicial Conference of the United States in September 1974, is requited for the use of the Clerk of Court for the purpose of initiating the civil docket sheet. (SEE INSTRUCTIONS ON THE REVERSE

OF THE FORM.)

l(a) PLAINTIFFS
EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY COMMISSION

DEFENDANTS
GEOSCIENCE ENGINEERING & TESTING INC.

(b) COUNTY OF RESIDENCE OF FIRST LISTED PLAINTIFF ~ (EXCEPT IN U.S. PLAINTIFF CASES)

(C) ATTORNEYS (FIRM NAME, ADDRESS, AND TELEPHONE NUMBER)

Rose Adewale-Mendes, Supervisory Trial Attorney

EEOC-Houston District Office

1919 Smith Street, 7th Floor

Houston, Texas 77002

-~

(713) 209-3404

COUNTY OF RESIDENCE OF FIRST LISTED DEFENDANT

(IN U.S. PLAINTIFF CASES ONLY)

| |~t,,.Bd .~’~$ COU~

NOTE: IN LAND CONDEMNATION CASES USF,.TFI~EO~"A~’I0~F iErltffoXBS

TRACT OF LAND INVOLVED ’ ~UtBfll’ll t~’?l~~ v

ATTORNEYS (IF KNOWN)

SEP g 9 200fi

II. BASIS OF JURISDICTION ~,cE~xn~o~oxo~Y)

Ix] 1 U.S. Government Plaintiff
[] 2 U.S. Government Defendant

[] 3 Federal Question (U.S. Government Not a Pa~’y)
[] 4 Diversity (Indicate Citizenship of Panics in Item IIl)

III. CITIZENSHIP OF PRINCIPAL PARTIES

(For Diversity Cases Only) FOa r’LA~rrtP’~ ~ Or~ BOX FOa D~DAr, rr)

PTF DEF

PTF DEF

Citizen of This State [ ] 1 [ ] 1 Incorporated or Principal Place [ ] 4 [ ] 4

of Business in This State

CitizenofAnotherState [ ] 2 [ ] 2 Incorporated and Principal Place [ ] S [ ] $

of Business in Another State

Citizen or Subject of a []3 []3 Foreign Nation

[ ] 6 [ ] 6

Foreign Country

IV. CAUSE OF ACTION ~c~rFi~os CIVILSTATLrI~UNDF~RWII1CHYOUAREFILTNGANDWRITEA BRII~ STATEMENTOFCAUSE. DONOTCITEJUR/SDICTIONALSTATUTESUNLESSDIVffRSITY) Geoscience Engineering & Testing Inc. engaged in unlawful employment practices, in violation of Section 703(a)(1) of Title VII, 42 U.S.C. §2000e-2(a)(l), by subjecting Ms. Galvan and other female employees, to unwelcome comments or touching of a sexual nature and constructive discharging of some of them because of their sex, female.

V. NATURE OF SUIT (PLACE AN x IN ONE BOX ONLY)

CONTRACT

TORTS

FORFEITURE/PENALTY

BANKRUPTCY

OTHER STATUTES

[] II0 ~
[] lZ0 ~’~
[] 130 Mtn~Ac~ [] 140 ~esot:ab~e tnstr.m~t
] 150 ~of~t &
[] 151 ~ ]152 ~of~dt~
] 153 ~of~t or
[] 160 ~1~’~ [] 190 O~C~
[] ~9s co
REAL PROPERTY
[] 210 LandCm~nnma~a [] 220 Fo~osu~ [] 230 ~’~* ~ & ~*
~] 240 T~ to ~ [] 245 T~ ~ ~bdtW
[] ~9o ~ ~ ~ ~

PERSONAL INJURY [] 310 A~rplane
[] 340 M~
[] 355 ~V~
[] 360 ~ P~ ~ CIVIL RIGHTS [] 441 [x] 442 [] 443
[] 44~ w~f~ [] ~0 ~c,~

PERSONAL INJURY [] 362~~al ~-
[] 36C=
[] 368 Ast~tos Personal
PE~ONAL PROPER~ [] 370 [] 371 ~ m [] 3S0 [] 38S
PRISONER PETITIONS [] 510
Hal~as
[] 530 [] S3S ~ [] S40
[] sso o~

[] 610 A~n~tu~ [] 620 OtlmF~ D~ [] 625 Dt, ug ~lated Se:zu~ of
~ 21 U~ 881
~ 630 ~ ~m
[] ~o ~ [] 650 ~ ~
[] 660 ~"~ ~$
[] 69o
L~OR [] 710 F~r La~Sta~m~a~ [] 72o i~
[] 740 [] 7~o ~ [] 79~~1

[] 422 ~ 2s US~ ~58 [] 423 w,~ ~ U~: 157
PROPERTY RIGHTS
[] s~o ~o~u
[] 830 Patent
[] s4o ~’~
SOCIAL SECURITY
[] 861 HIA(1395a) [] 862 aacx t~s 023)
[] 863 DIWC/DIWW (405(8))
[] s~ ~ t,~ x~ [] 86S ~[
FEDERAL TAX SUITS
[ ] L~e.~OeadaaT~tar? (U $ PlamtaT c¢
[] 871 IRS-ThlrdPa~y26USC?60~

[] 400 sure R~apoort~am~t [] 410 Anttmm
[] 450 C~CC ~t~
[] 460 [] 470 ~l~c~
[] 875 c~c~
[] 895 F~ ofmr~t,m Act ] 900 ~t orF~
[] 950 C~atm~h~ofSme [] 890

VI. ORIGIN
Ix] 1 Original Proceeding

(PLACE AN x IN ONE BOX ONLY)

[] 2 Removed from

[] 3 Remanded from

State Court

Appellate Court

Transferred from

[] 4 Reinstated or

[] 5 another district

Reopened

(specify)

VII. REQUESTED IN

CHECK IF TInS lS A CLASS ACTION

COMPLAINT: [] traDER F.R.C.P. 23

DEMAND $

VIII. RELATED CASE(S) IF ANY ~s~ m~y

JUDGE

Appeal to District

[] 6 Multidlstrict

[] 7 Judge from

Litigation

Magistrate Judgment

Check YES only if demanded in complaint:
o~,~,,, [xIrEs []no
DOCKET NUMBER

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

 
 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS

United St~:e" ~ourts Southern Dis,,;;ct of Texa~
ENTEREO
MAY 1 fb 2007

HOUSTON DIVISION

Michael N. Milby, Clerk of Court

EQUAL EMPLOYMENT

§

OPPORTUNITY COMMISSION

§

Plaintiff

§ CIVIL ACTION NO. H-05-3365

§

§

GEOSCIENCE ENGINEERING &

§

TESTING INC.

§

§ JURY TRIAL DEMANDED

§

§

Defendant.

§

------------------------------§

CONSENT DECREE Plaintiff, the United States Equal Employment Opportunity Commission ("Commission" or "EEOC") and Defendant, Geoscience Engineering & Testing Inc. ("Defendant"), agree to entry of this Consent Decree (sometimes referred to as "the Decree"). I. Background and History of Proceedings A. Charging Party Michele M. Galvan ("Charging Party" or "Ms. Galvan") filed Charge of Discrimination No. 330-2003-03395 with the Commission alleging Defendant
violated Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, as amended, 42 U.S.C. §2000e et seq.
("Title V""). B. On September 29, 2005, after investigating the Charge and finding
discrimination, the Commission commenced this action alleging that Defendant's conduct constituted sexual harassment of Michele M. Galvan and class member Cynthia Perez ("Ms. Perez") and constructive discharge of Ms. Galvan in violation of Section 703 (a) of Title VII.

C. Defendant denied the allegations in the complaint.

D. The parties wish to avoid the risks, uncertainties and expenses of continued

litigation. Accordingly, the parties have agreed to settle this lawsuit. Defendant's consent

to the entry of this Decree nor any of the terms set forth in it shall not constitute or be

construed as an admission of any Title VII violation. Both parties agree that this Consent

Decree is being entered into for the sole purpose of compromising disputed claims without

the necessity for protracted litigation.

E. The Commission and Defendant stipulate to the jurisdiction of the Court and

the satisfaction of all administrative prerequisites. The parties further waive hearing and

entry of findings of fact and conclusions of law on all issues.

IT IS ORDERED that:

COVERAGE AND DURATION

1

This Consent Decree is entered in full and complete settlement of any and all

claims arising out of or asserted in Civil Action No. H-05-3365 ("this lawsuit") and

Charge No. 330-2003-03395 ("the Charge"). This Consent Decree remains in effect

for four years from the date of entry ("Consent Period").

INJUNCTIVE RELIEF

2.

During the Consent Period, Defendant, its owners, officers, and managers

shall not engage in any employment practice which violates Title VII by unlawfully

subjecting female employees to sexual harassment or otherwise discriminating

against any employee because of such person's sex.

3.

During the Consent Period, Defendant shall not engage in any employment

practice which violates Title VII by unlawfully creating, faCilitating or permitting the

-2-

existence of a work environment that is hostile to any employee on the basis of sex.

4.

During the Consent Period, Defendant willi not engage in any employment

practices which violate Title VII by unlawfully discriminating or retaliating in any

manner against any individual because the person has made a charge, testified,

assisted, or participated in any manner in the investigation, proceeding or hearing

by the Commission or in the court proceeding in connection with this case.

5.

During the Consent Period, Defendant shall not recruit or attempt to recruit

or hire any student, age 19 or younger who is enrolled in public or private school who

seeks work for a private company, as a condition of meeting his or her course

requirements in a distributive education or related program.

6.

Defendant will not reveal any information about Ms. Galvan or Ms. Perez to any

potential employers, who call for a job reference, except the dates of hire and

separation, job title, compensation and that each is eligible for rehire. Defendant shall

not advise any potential employer who calls for a job reference about the charge of

discrimination filed by Ms. Galvan, this lawsuit and Decree, orthe participation of Ms.

Galvan or Ms. Perez in the charge investigation or this lawsuit.

7.

Defendant agrees that it does not have and will not create personnel files for

Ms. Galvan and Ms. Perez which contain any document referencing the charge of

discrimination, the Commission's lawsuit or this Consent Decree. These documents,

if any, shall not be part of their personnel files but shall be kept segregated in a

separate, confidential folder.

-3-

TRAINING

8.

Defendant shall provide Equal Employment Opportunity (!IEEO") training to all

its owners, managers, supervisors and other employees in its Houston, Texas

location regarding employment discrimination, including, but not limited to the illegality

of sexual harassment and sex-based employment decisions. The training shall be

conducted within one hundred twenty (120) days after the entry of this Decree. The

minimum duration of each training shall be two (2) hours. Written acknowledgment

of receipt of the training shall be obtained by Defendant from all individuals attending

the training and retained among the employment records of Defendant. The training

shall also be conducted annually during the Consent Period. Copies of the training

materials shall be distributed to the EEOC at least fifteen (15) days prior to each

training session. The person who administers the training shall have at least five

years of experience in labor and employment law.

9.

The portion of the training on sexual harassment shall (i) explain that sexual

harassment is unlawful; (ij) instruct what conduct may constitute sexual harassment;

(iii) ensure that Defendant's managers and supervisors know how to enforce

Defendant's sexual harassment policy; and (iv) ensure that each employee is

informed of how to report conduct she/he believes to constitute sexual harassment.

10.

Defendant shall notify the Commission of the completion of the training by

submitting a report indicating when and where the training took place, the duration of

the training, and the identity of the trainer(s) and the attendees. A copy of the

-4-

acknowledgment of attendance signed by the attendees shall be submitted to the EEOC as part of Defendant's reporting obligations, under Paragraph 22, below.
COMPLAINT PROCEDURES 11. Defendant shall establish a complaint procedure that is designed to encourage
employees to come forward with valid complaints regarding sex discrimination including sexual harassment, sex-based harassment and retaliation regardless ofthe position held by the alleged harasser. Defendant's complaint procedure shall at a minimum provide the following: (i) simple, convenient, confidential and reliable mechanisms for reporting incidents of sexual harassment, sex-based harassment and retaliation; (ii) prompt investigation of complaints of sexual harassment, sex-based harassment and/or retaliation; (iii) written findings of the result of any investigation of a discrimination complaint and the remedial action proposed, if any; (iv) an effective means of promptly communicating to the complaining party, in writing, the results of the investigation and the remedial action taken or proposed, or not taken: (v) appropriate remedial action to resolve the complaint and to deter future incidents of sexual harassment, sex-based harassment and/or retaliation; (vi) assurances that the complaining party shall not be subjected to intimidation, harassment and/or retaliation; and (vii) the name and telephone number of the EEOC Houston Office (1919 Smith Street, Houston, Texas 77002, telephone: 7132093401) which an employee may consult to obtain information regarding employment discrimination. Defendant shall report compliance under this section, as set out in Paragraph 22.
HARASSMENT POLICY
-5-

"

12.

Within one hundred twenty (120) days from the entry of this Decree, Defendant

shall adopt a written sexual harassment policy. The sexual harassment policy will at

a minimum meet the following criteria: (i) prohibits any act, policy or practice that has

the effect of harassing or intimidating any employee on the basis of sex in violation

of Title VII; (ii) prohibits any act, policy or practice that has the effect of creating,

facilitating or permitting the existence of a work environment that is hostile to any

employee through acts such as physical/verbal abuse and derogatory comments

based on sex in violation of Title VII; (iii) defines and provides examples of sexual

harassment and sex-based harassment; (iv) provides for prompt investigation of

sexual harassment or sex-based harassment complaints and for prompt remedial

action, which is appropriate and effective, to remedy the discrimination; (v) imposes

a duty on all Defendant's owners, officers, manager, and supervisory personnel to

actively monitor all work areas to ensure compliance with the Defendant's sexual

harassment policy; (vi) identifies by name, job title, and telephone number the

person(s) who is responsible for accepting complaints of sexual harassment, sex-

based harassment and/or retaliation; (vii) identifies by name, job title, and telephone

number the person(s) who is responsible for investigating complaints of sexual

harassment, sex-based harassment and retaliation; (viii) encourages all Defendant

employees to report any incident and/or complaint of sex discrimination, sexual

harassment or sex-based harassment and/or retaliation of which they become aware

to the person(s) responsible for accepting and/or investigating such complaints; (ix)

provides that upon the conclusion of Defendant's investigation, the results of the

investigation and the remedial actions taken or proposed will be promptly

-6-

"

communicated in writing to the complaining party; (x) provides for substantial and

progressive discipline for violating Defendant's sexual harassment policy up to and

including discharge, in appropriate cases. Defendant shall report compliance with this

section, under Paragraph 22.

POSTING REQUIREMENT

13.

Defendant agrees that within fifteen (15) days after entry of this Decree, it will

conspicuously post the attached notice (Exhibit "An) in an area accessible to all

employees at each of its locations for the duration of the Decree. Defendant shall

ensure that the postings are not altered, defaced or covered by any other material.

Defendant shall certify to the EEOC in writing within fifteen (15) days after entry ofthe

Decree that the Notices have been properly posted. Defendant shall report

compliance with this section, under Paragraph 22.

MONITORING

14.

During the Consent Period, Defendant will provide to the EEOC a copy of all

complaints of sexual harassment and sex-based harassment made by any employee

and describe their investigation of the complaint, the results of the complaint and

describe the disciplinary action, if any, imposed. The documents provided to the

EEOC shall also identify the name and title of the persons involved in the complaint,

and the addresses and telephone numbers where they may be contacted by the

EEOC. Defendant shall report compliance with this section, under Paragraph 22.

MONETARY RELIEF

15.

Defendant agrees to pay the total sum of TWELFTH THOUSAND DOLLARS

AND NO/100 DOLLARS ($12,000.00), in full and fina/settlementofthe Commission's

-7-

.'

lawsuit to provide monetary relief to Michele M. Galvan. Said sum shall be paid

within fifteen (15) days after the date of entry of the Decree by a cashiers check or

other bank guaranteed check. Defendant shall mail or deliver the settlement check

to Ms. Galvan at the address provided by the Commission to Defendant through

Defendant's undersigned counsel of record in this case. A copy of the check

disbursed to Ms. Galvan shall be mailed to the Commission's undersigned counsel

of record on the same day the check is mailed to Ms. Galvan.

16.

The sum payable to Ms. Galvan may be subject to federal income tax.

Defendant agrees to issue Internal Revenue Service ("IRS") Form 1099 or an

equivalent form to Ms. Galvan for all sums paid pursuant to this Consent Decree not

later than January 31, 2008, at the address to which the settlement check referenced

in paragraph 15 is delivered. Ms. Galvan will be responsible for paying any federal,

state or local taxes, including federal income tax that may be due on the

aforementioned monetary award.

17.

Defendant agrees to pay the total sum of THREE THOUSAND DOLLARS AND

NO/100 DOLLARS ($3,000.00), in full and final settlement of the Commission's

lawsuit to provide monetary relief to Cynthia Perez. Said sum shall be paid within

fifteen (15) days from the date of entry of the Decree by a cashiers check or other

bank guaranteed check. Defendant shall mail or deliver the settlement check to Ms.

Perez at the address provided by the Commission to Defendant through Defendant's

undersigned counsel of record in this case. A copy of the check disbursed to Ms.

Perez shall be mailed to the Commission's undersigned counsel of record on the

same day the check is mailed to Ms. Perez.

-8-

.'

18.

The sum payable to Ms. Perez may be subject to federal income tax.

Defendant agrees to issue Internal Revenue Service ("IRS") Form 1099 or an

equivalent form to Ms. Perez for all sums paid pursuant to this Consent Decree not

later than January 31 , 2008, at the address to which the settlement check referenced

in paragraph 17 is delivered. Ms. Perez will be responsible for paying any federal,

state or local taxes, including federal income tax that may be due on the

aforementioned monetary award.

-- ----RECORD KEEPING

19.

During the term of this Decree, Defendant shall maintain records (including

name, sex, age, social security number, address and telephone number, hire date,

termination date, if any) of each person who is currently employed with Defendant

and those who are hired by Defendant for any duration of time during this Decree.

20.

During the term of this Decree, Defendant shall maintain records (including

name, sex, age, social security number, address and telephone number, hire date,

termination date if any) of each person who complains either orally or in writing of

gender discrimination, sexual harassment or sex-based harassment and retaliation.

Defendant will keep copies of its investigative findings, reports, notes, and witnesses

statements made during i~~_illtefDaUn)/.estigations of sexual harassment complaints

and provide copies to the EEOC as part of its compliance obligation, under Paragragh

22.

21.

Nothing contained in this Decree shall be construed to limit any obligation

Defendant may otherwise have to maintain records under Title VII or any other law

or regulation.

-9-

REPORTING

22.

Defendant shall furnish to EEOC the written reports and certifications

required by this Decree, including those required by paragraphs 8,10,11,12,13,14,

15, 17, and 20 of this Decree. Unless stated otherwise in a specific paragraph

above, the first report shall be due one hundred eighty (180) days after the entry of

the Decree and all subsequent reports shall be due in twelve (12) month intervals, on

the last day of the twelfth full month. The notifications, certifications or reports

required by this Decree shall be submitted in writing to the EEOC as the following

address: Rose Adewale-Mendes, Supervisory Trial Attorney, EEOC Houston District

Office, 6th Floor, Houston, Texas 77002.

MISCELLANEOUS PROVISIONS

23.

Each party to this action shall bear its own costs and attorney's fees.

24.

This Consent Decree shall be binding on Defendant and all of Defendant's

successors-in-interest, and Defendant will notify all such successors-in-interest of the

existence and terms of this Consent Decree.

25.

During the Consent Period, the Court shall retain jurisdiction to assure

compliance with this Decree and to permit entry of such further orders or

modifications as may be appropriate. The Commission is specifically authorized to

seek Court-ordered enforcement of this Decree in the event of a breach of any of the

provisions herein.

26.

The Commission agrees that, in the event the Commission believes Defendant

is in violation of any provision of this Consent Decree, the Commission shall notify

Defendant, through its undersigned counsel, of such violation and afford Defendant

-10-

the opportunity to remedy as may be appropriate any such alleged violation within 30

days of such notice, before instituting any legal action to enforce such provision{s).

27.

Nothing in this Consent pecreeshall be constllJed to preclude the Commission

from filing a separate action under TitJe VII or liIny other statute which the Commission

enforces tn the futwra for any alleged violations by Defendant not resolved by this

Decree.

28

Each signatory certifies that he/she is authorized to execute this document on

behalf of the party whom he/she represents.

Signed!his~YOf_~":-'IC...::;..-J'--___"2007atHOLJstcn. Texas.
~'~

AGREED AND CONSENTec TO:

ATIORNEY FOR PLAINTIFF eaUAL EMPI..OYMeNT OPPORTUNITY
COMMISSION

AITORNEY FOR DEFENDANTS GEOSCIENCE ENGINEERING &
TESTING INC.

By: ~t::J~~dL)~I bv1:i~/"~_
Ros dewale-Mendes "OHIO Bar No. 0024652 SDN: 10541 Equal ~mployment Opportt..lnity
Commission 1919 Smltl1 Street. rr' Floor Houston, Texas 77002
-11-

.'
Telephone: (713) 209-3404 Fax: (713) 209-3402

Fax: (713) 977 9941

-12-

...

NOTICE TO EMPLOYEES
This Notice is being posted pursuant to a Consent Decree entered in Equal Employment Opportunity Commission v. Geoscience Engineering & Testing, Inc., Civil Action No. H-053365, in the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas, Houston Division.
Federal law prohibits discrimination against any employee or applicant for employment because of the individual's race, color, religion, sex, national origin, disability or age (40 and over), with respect to hiring, promotion, discipline, firing, compensation or other terms, conditions or privileges of employment.
Federal law also prohibits gender discrimination in the workplace, such as sexual harassment, a sexually hostile work environment, retaliation or constructive discharge, because of sex.
Geoscience Engineering & Testing, Inc. supports and will comply with such federal law in all respects, and will not intentionally take any adverse action against individuals because of their sex, race, color, religious practices, national origin, age or disability with respect to hiring, compensation, discharge or the terms, conditions or privileges of employment.
Geoscience Engineering & Testing, Inc. will not intentionally engage in any employment practice that has the effect of creating or tolerating a hostile environment for employees because of sex, including sexual harassment and sex-based harassment, race, color, religious practices, national origin, age or disability and will not retaliate against any employee for engaging in protected activity. Geoscience Engineering & Testing, Inc. will promptly investigate any claim of unlawful discrimination or harassment and will take prompt and appropriate remedial action.
An employee who believes she or he has been harassed or discriminated against based on your sex or other protected status should promptly report the discriminatory conduct to

or to the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC). You may contact the EEOC at 1919 Smith St., Houston, Texas, 77002; the EEOC National Call Center at 1 800 669 4000 and at www.eeoc.gov.This Notice will remain posted for at least four (4) years by agreement with the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission.

Signed: _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ __ JAMES PALAVAN, Owner

Date:- - - - - - - - -

DO NOT REMOVE THIS NOTICE UNTIL: June 30,

,2011.

Exhibit A

 
 E.E.O.C. v. Geoscience Engineering & Testing, Inc., Not Reported in F.Supp.2d (2007)

2007 WL 951632 Only the Westlaw citation is currently available.
United States District Court, S.D. Texas,
Houston Division.
EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY COMMISSION, Plaintiff, v.
GEOSCIENCE ENGINEERING & TESTING INC., Defendant.
Civil Action No. H-05-3365. | March 28, 2007.
Attorneys and Law Firms
James Sacher, Rose Adewale-Mendes, Erania Ebron Martin, Equal Employment Opportunity Commission Houston District Office, Houston, TX, for Plaintiff.
James Nathan Overstreet, Williams and Overstreet PC, Houston, TX, for Defendant.
Opinion
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
EWING WERLEIN, JR., United States District Judge.
*1 Pending is Plaintiff Equal Employment Opportunity Commission’s Motion for Partial Summary Judgment (Document No. 18). After carefully considering the motion, response, reply, and the applicable law, the Court concludes as follows.
Plaintiff Equal Employment Opportunity Commission filed this complaint against Defendant Geoscience Engineering & Testing, Inc., alleging sexual harassment in violation of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 (“Title VII”) and 42 U.S.C. § 1981. Plaintiff alleges that since at least 2003, Defendant’s owner, Jim Palavan (“Palavan”), has subjected female employees, including Michele M. Galvan (“Galvan”) and Cynthia Perez (“Perez”), to “unwelcome comments and or touching of a sexual nature and constructive discharge of some of them because of their sex, female.” See Document No. 1 ¶ 9. Plaintiff now moves for partial summary judgment and seeks (1) to dismiss Defendant’s affirmative defense that “Plaintiff has failed to state a cause of action upon which relief may be granted”; (2) to preclude Defendant from asserting a Faragher/Ellerth affirmative defense because Palavan, the alleged harasser, is a proxy for Defendant employer.1

1

Plaintiff also “seeks a ruling that it is entitled to have

the Court give an alter ego jury instruction at the trial of

this action .” It is premature to consider the proposed

alter ego jury instruction, and the motion will be denied

at this time without prejudice.

Rule 56(c) provides that summary judgment “shall be rendered forthwith if the pleadings, depositions, answers to interrogatories, and admissions on file, together with the affidavits, if any, show that there is no genuine issue as to any material fact and that the moving party is entitled to a judgment as a matter of law.” FED. R. CIV. P. 56(c). The moving party must “demonstrate the absence of a genuine issue of material fact.” Celotex Corp. v. Catrett, 477 U.S. 317, 106 S.Ct. 2548, 2553, 91 L.Ed.2d 265 (1986).
Once the movant carries this burden, the burden shifts to the nonmovant to show that summary judgment should not be granted. Morris v. Covan World Wide Moving, Inc., 144 F.3d 377, 380 (5th Cir.1998). A party opposing a properly supported motion for summary judgment may not rest upon mere allegations or denials in a pleading, and unsubstantiated assertions that a fact issue exists will not suffice. Id. “[T]he nonmoving party must set forth specific facts showing the existence of a ‘genuine’ issue concerning every essential component of its case.” Id.
In considering a motion for summary judgment, the district court must view the evidence “through the prism of the substantive evidentiary burden.” Anderson v. Liberty Lobby, Inc., 477 U.S. 242, 106 S.Ct. 2505, 2513, 91 L.Ed.2d 202 (1986). All justifiable inferences to be drawn from the underlying facts must be viewed in the light most favorable to the nonmoving party. Matsushita Elec. Indus. Co. v. Zenith Radio Corp., 475 U.S. 574, 106 S.Ct. 1348, 1356, 89 L.Ed.2d 538 (1986). “If the record, viewed in this light, could not lead a rational trier of fact to find” for the nonmovant, then summary judgment is proper. Kelley v. Price-Macemon, Inc., 992 F.2d 1408, 1413 (5th Cir.1993) (citing Matsushita, 106 S.Ct. at 1351). On the other hand, if “the factfinder could reasonably find in [the nonmovant’s] favor, then summary judgment is improper.” Id. Even if the standards of Rule 56 are met, a court has discretion to deny a motion for summary judgment if it believes that “the better course would be to proceed to a full trial.” Anderson, 106 S.Ct. at 2513.
*2 Plaintiff seeks summary judgment striking Defendant’s first affirmative defense, which states (without setting forth the basis of the defense) that “Plaintiff has failed to state a cause of action upon which relief may be granted.” Defendant argues that the affirmative defense should not be dismissed because “[t]he summary judgment record in
1

E.E.O.C. v. Geoscience Engineering & Testing, Inc., Not Reported in F.Supp.2d (2007)

case [sic] at least supports a factual determination that much of the alleged conduct did not take place.” However, Defendant does not assert that, accepting as true all well-pleaded facts in Plaintiff’s complaint, Plaintiff has failed to allege sufficient facts to state in its Complaint an actionable sexual harassment claim. Indeed, Defendant concedes that fact issues exist and that credibility determinations remain for the jury on whether certain of the conduct occurred and, if so, whether it was of such a nature as to constitute sexual harassment. See Muscletech Research & Dev., Inc. v. E. Coast Ingredients, LLC, No. 00-CV-0753A(F), 2004 WL 941815, at *41-42 (W.D.N.Y. Mar.25, 2004) (granting plaintiff’s motion for summary judgment to dismiss affirmative defense of failure to state a claim where defendants asserted that genuine issues of material fact existed on plaintiff’s copyright and trademark claims, but did not assert that plaintiff’s claims “fail[ed] to allege sufficient facts to state a claim for any particular relief.”). As such, Defendant’s affirmative defense that “Plaintiff has failed to state a cause of action upon which relief may be granted” lacks merit, and Plaintiff’s motion for summary judgment to strike the defense will be granted.
Plaintiff also seeks summary judgment that Defendant may not raise the affirmative defense set forth in Burlington Indus., Inc. v. Ellerth, 524 U.S. 742, 118 S.Ct. 2257, 141 L.Ed.2d 633 (1998) and Faragher v. City of Boca Raton, 524 U.S. 775, 118 S.Ct. 2275, 141 L.Ed.2d 662 (1998) to avoid Defendant’s vicarious liability. Plaintiff contends that the sexual harasser was Palavan, and that (1) “[t]he summary judgment evidence establishes that Mr. Palvan [sic] is [Defendant]’s alter ego or proxy”; and (2) Defendant has not pled the Faragher/Ellerth affirmative defense.2 Defendant in its response does not deny that Palavan is the owner, shareholder, officer and manager of Defendant, that he “makes the decisions concerning hiring, firing, promotions and pay increases,” and that he therefore may be regarded as a proxy for Defendant. Nor does Defendant deny that if Palavan is a proxy for Defendant, the Faragher/Ellerth defense is unavailable to Defendant to avoid vicarious liability for Palavan’s alleged sexual harassment of Galvan and Perez. See, e.g., Ackel, 339 F.3d at 383-84 (“[T]he Faragher/Ellerth affirmative defense is unavailable” where harassing employee is a proxy for the employer); EEOC v. J.H. Walker, Inc., No. H-05-2232, 2007 WL 172626, at *19 (S.D.Tex. Jan.18, 2007) (Rosenthal, J.) (defendant employer was “not entitled to raise” the Faragher/Ellerth defense where alleged harasser, who was the founder and president of defendant corporation who made hiring and compensation decisions, was “indisputably within that class of an employer organization’s officials who may be treated as the organization’s proxy.”) (quoting Ackel, 339 F.3d at 383-84).

2

“An employer is subject to vicarious liability to a

victimized employee for an actionable hostile

environment created by a supervisor with immediate

(or successively higher) authority over the employee.”

Ellerth, 118 S.Ct. at 2270. The Fifth Circuit reads

Faragher and Ellerth to hold that an employer is

vicariously liable for its employees’ activities in two

types of situations: “(1) there is a tangible employment

action or (2) the harassing employee is a proxy for the

employer.” Ackel v. Nat’l Commc’ ns, Inc., 339 F.3d

376, 383 (5th Cir.2003). “[T]he only relevant factor to

the determination of whether [the harassing employee]

was a proxy for [the corporate employer] is whether he

held a ‘sufficiently high position in the management

hierarchy’ so as to speak for the corporate employer.”

Id. at 383-84 (noting that the Supreme Court

“suggest[s] that an owner, supervisor holding a

sufficiently high position in the management hierarchy,

proprietor, partner, or corporate officer” may be treated

as a corporation’s proxy) (quoting Faragher, 118 S.Ct.

at 2284) (internal quotations omitted). If the harassing

employee is within that class of corporate officials who

may be treated as an organization’s proxy, his actions

are “imputable to [the corporate employer] and the

Faragher/Ellerth affirmative defense is unavailable.”

Id. at 384.

*3 Instead, Defendant argues that it should be entitled to the Faragher/Ellerth affirmative defense “with respects to acts not attributable directly to Mr. Jim A. Palavan.” Defendant at one point requests “leave to amend its answer to ... clarify the affirmative defense.” The request to amend comes too late, after the close of the dispositive and non-dispositive motion deadline, and Defendant has failed to show good cause to modify the scheduling order. See FED. R. CIV. P. 16(b) (scheduling order shall not be modified except upon showing of good cause and by leave of the district court); S & W Enters., LLC v. SouthTrust Bank of Ala., N.A., 315 F.3d 533, 536 (5th Cir.2003); Ratliff v. City of Houston, No. H-02-3809, 2005 WL 1745468, at *4 (S.D.Tex. July 25, 2005) (Atlas, J.); see also Sw. Bell Tel. Co. v. City of El Paso, 346 F.3d 541, 546 (5th Cir.2003) (setting forth factors to consider in determining good cause). Moreover, it would be futile to allow Defendant to amend its answer to raise the defense “with respects to acts not attributable directly to Mr. Jim A. Palavan,” inasmuch as the allegations in Plaintiff’s complaint concern only acts that are “attributable directly” to Palavan. See Jamieson v. Shaw, 772 F.2d 1205, 1208 (5th Cir.1985) (futility of amendment is acceptable justification for denying leave to amend); Avatar Exploration, Inc. v. Chevron, U.S.A., Inc., 933 F.2d 314, 321 (5th Cir.1991) (“We also affirm denials of motions to amend when amendment would be futile.”). Accordingly, Defendant’s untimely request for leave to amend its answer to plead the Faragher/Ellerth affirmative defense “with respects to acts not attributable directly to Mr. Jim A. Palavan” will be denied.

2

E.E.O.C. v. Geoscience Engineering & Testing, Inc., Not Reported in F.Supp.2d (2007)

For the foregoing reasons, it is
ORDERED that Plaintiff Equal Employment Opportunity Commission’s Motion for Partial Summary Judgment (Document No. 18) is GRANTED IN PART, and Defendant Geoscience Engineering & Testing, Inc.’s first affirmative defense challenging the Complaint itself, that “Plaintiff has failed to state a cause of action upon which relief may be granted,” is DISMISSED; Plaintiff’s motion for summary judgment that Defendant may not raise the Faragher/Ellerth affirmative defense is DENIED as moot because Defendant has not pled and may not plead that

affirmative defense; and Plaintiff’s request for an alter ego jury instruction at trial is DENIED as premature, without prejudice to being re-urged in Plaintiff’s requested jury instructions included in the Joint Pretrial Order.
The Clerk will enter this Order and provide a correct copy to all parties.
	  

3

 
 5/31/2017

DC CM/ECF LIVE- US District Court-Texas Southern
U.S. District Court SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS (Houston) CIVIL DOCKET FOR CASE #: 4:05-cv-03365

CLOSED,MOTREF

Equal Employment Opportunity Commission v. Geoscience Engineering & Testing Incorporated Assigned to: Judge Ewing Werlein, Jr Cause: 42:2000e Job Discrimination (Employment)

Date Filed: 09/29/2005 Date Terminated: 05/18/2007 Jury Demand: Plaintiff Nature of Suit: 442 Civil Rights: Jobs Jurisdiction: U.S. Government Plaintiff

Plaintiff
Equal Employment Opportunity Commission

represented by James Sacher EEOC 1201 Louisiana 6th Floor Houston, TX 77002 713-651-4963 Email: james.sacher@eeoc.gov LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

Rose Adewale-Mendes Equal Employment Opportunity Commission Houston District Ofﬁce 1201 Louisiana St 6th Fl Houston, TX 77002 713-651-4900 Email: rose.adewale-mendes@eeoc.gov LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

Aimee Lynn McFerren EEOC 1919 Smith 7th Floor Houston, TX 77002 713-209-3390 Fax: 713-209-3402 Email: aimee.mcferren@eeoc.gov ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

https://ecf.txsd.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/DktRpt.pl?550709240096154-L_1_0-1

Erania Ebron U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission Hearings Unit 1919 Smith Street 7th Floor Houston, TX 77002
1/6

5/31/2017

DC CM/ECF LIVE- US District Court-Texas Southern
713-651-4928 Fax: 713-751-0675 Email: erania.ebron@eeoc.gov ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

V.
Defendant
Geoscience Engineering & Testing Incorporated

represented by James Nathan Overstreet J. Nathan Overstreet Assoc PC 8711 Hwy 6 North Ste 230 Houston, TX 77095 281-855-1000 Fax: 281-855-4580 Email: overstreetlawﬁrm@gmail.com LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

Date Filed 09/29/2005
09/29/2005 09/29/2005
10/25/2005 11/04/2005 01/12/2006 01/12/2006
01/12/2006 01/14/2006 02/07/2006

# Docket Text
1 COMPLAINT against Geoscience Engineering & Testing Incorporated (Filing fee $ 0.) ﬁled by Equal Employment Opportunity Commission.(lﬁlmore, ) Additional attachment(s) added on 9/29/2005 (mmapps, ). (Entered: 09/29/2005)
Summons Issued as to Geoscience Engineering & Testing Incorporated , ﬁled.(lﬁlmore, ) (Entered: 09/29/2005)
2 ORDER for Initial Pretrial and Scheduling Conference and Order to Disclose Interested Persons. Initial Conference set for 2/10/2006 at 02:15 PM in Room 9136 before Judge Ewing Werlein, Jr. ( Signed by Judge Ewing Werlein, Jr ) Parties notiﬁed. (lﬁlmore, ) (Entered: 09/29/2005)
3 ANSWER to Complaint by Geoscience Engineering & Testing Incorporated, ﬁled. (svaught, ) (Entered: 10/27/2005)
4 SUMMONS Returned Executed. Geoscience Engineering & Testing Incorporated served on 10/19/2005, answer due 11/8/2005, ﬁled.(mkallie, ) (Entered: 11/10/2005)
5 NOTICE of Resetting. Parties notiﬁed Initial Conference set for 2/17/2006 at 02:15 PM in Room 9136 before Judge Ewing Werlein, Jr, ﬁled. (abonnaffons, ) (Entered: 01/12/2006)
6 Unopposed Motion To Add Counsel And MOTION for Erania Ebron Martin to Appear Pro Hac Vice by Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, ﬁled. Motion Docket Date 2/1/2006. (Attachments: # 1 Proposed Order)(ypippin, ) (Entered: 01/12/2006)
7 DISCLOSURE OF INTERESTED PARTIES by Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, ﬁled.(ypippin, ) (Entered: 01/12/2006)
8 ORDER granting 6 Motion to Appear Pro Hac Vice - Erania Ebron Martin.( Signed by Judge Ewing Werlein, Jr ) Parties notiﬁed.(abonnaffons, ) (Entered: 01/18/2006)
9 PROPOSED JOINT DISCOVERY/CASE MANAGEMENT PLAN by Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, Geoscience Engineering & Testing Incorporated, ﬁled.(ctaylor, ) (Entered: 02/08/2006)

https://ecf.txsd.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/DktRpt.pl?550709240096154-L_1_0-1

2/6

5/31/2017
02/14/2006 02/14/2006 02/16/2006 02/17/2006
02/22/2006
03/10/2006 06/07/2006 08/21/2006 12/29/2006 12/29/2006
12/29/2006 01/22/2007 01/23/2007 01/23/2007

DC CM/ECF LIVE- US District Court-Texas Southern
10 INITIAL DISCLOSURES by Geoscience Engineering & Testing Incorporated, ﬁled. (ledwards, ) (Entered: 02/14/2006)
11 JOINT DISCOVERY/CASE MANAGEMENT PLAN by all parties, ﬁled.(jmarchand, ) (Entered: 02/15/2006)
12 NOTICE of Resetting. Parties notiﬁed Initial Conference set for 2/17/2006 at 02:00 PM in Courtroom 704 before Magistrate Judge Frances H Stacy, ﬁled. (abonnaffons, ) (Entered: 02/16/2006)
13 Minute Entry for proceedings held before Judge Frances H Stacy. SCHEDULING CONFERENCE held on 2/17/2006, docket control Order to follow. Mediation due by 6/30/2006 Appearances: Rose Adewale-Mendes, Erania Ebron Martin, James Nathan Overstreet.(Court Reporter: ERO)(Digital # 2:20 - 2:32)(ERO:B White), ﬁled.(bwhite, ) (Entered: 02/22/2006)
14 ORDER, Amended Pleadings due by 6/1/2006 Joinder of Parties due by 6/1/2006 Pltf Expert Witness List due by 8/1/2006 Pltf Expert Report due by 8/1/2006 Deft Expert Witness List due by 9/1/2006 Deft Expert Report due by 9/1/2006 Discovery due by 11/30/2006 Dispositive Motion Filing due by 12/30/2006 Non-Dispositive Motion Filing due by 12/30/2006 Joint Pretrial Order due by 4/6/2007 Docket Call set for 5/4/2007 at 04:00 PM before Judge Ewing Werlein, Jr.( Signed by Judge Frances H Stacy ) Parties notiﬁed.(bwhite, ) (Entered: 02/22/2006)
15 INITIAL DISCLOSURES by Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, ﬁled. (Attachments: # 1 Continuation # 2 Continuation # 3 Continuation # 4 Continuation # 5 Continuation)(rroberts, ) (Entered: 03/15/2006)
16 FIRST SUPPLEMENTAL INITIAL DISCLOSURES by Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, ﬁled.(sguevara, ) (Entered: 06/07/2006)
17 NOTICE to all counsel regarding courtroom and chambers location, ﬁled. (kmurphy, ) (Entered: 08/21/2006)
18 MOTION for Partial Summary Judgment by Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, ﬁled. Motion Docket Date 1/18/2007. (Attachments: # 1 Proposed Order)(ejuarez, ) (Entered: 12/29/2006)
19 MOTION to Compel Production of Documents and Answer to Plaintiffs Discovery, by Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, ﬁled. Motion Docket Date 1/18/2007. (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit # 2 Exhibit # 3 Exhibit # 4 Proposed Order)(ejuarez, ) Modiﬁed on 12/29/2006 (ejuarez, ). (Entered: 12/29/2006)
20 Summary Judgment Materials / Exhibit List by Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, ﬁled. (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit # 2 Continuation)(ejuarez, ) (Entered: 12/29/2006)
21 RESPONSE in Opposition to Pltfs 19 MOTION to Compel Production of Documents and Discovery Answers, ﬁled by Geoscience Engineering & Testing Incorporated. (psmith, ) Additional attachment(s) added on 1/22/2007 (psmith, ). (Entered: 01/22/2007)
22 CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE of Deft's 27 Response in Opposition to Pltf's Motion by Geoscience Engineering & Testing Incorporated, ﬁled.(sguevara, ) Modiﬁed on 2/16/2007 linked to #27 (ltien, ). (Entered: 01/23/2007)
23 This is a duplicate of 22 . CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE by Geoscience Engineering & Testing Incorporated, ﬁled. (mewilliams, ) Modiﬁed on 2/16/2007 (ltien, ). (Entered: 01/23/2007)

https://ecf.txsd.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/DktRpt.pl?550709240096154-L_1_0-1

3/6

5/31/2017
01/23/2007

DC CM/ECF LIVE- US District Court-Texas Southern
27 RESPONSE in Opposition to 18 MOTION for Partial Summary Judgment, ﬁled by Geoscience Engineering & Testing Incorporated. (Attachments: # 1 Proposed Order # 2 Exhibit A# 3 Exhibit B# 4 Exhibit C# 5 Exhibit D# 6 Exhibits E-K)(ltien, ) (Entered: 02/16/2007)

01/29/2007

24 REPLY to Defendant's Response to Plaintiff's 18 MOTION for summary judgment, ﬁled by Equal Employment Opportunity Commission. (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit Veriﬁcation Page)(Adewale-Mendes, Rose) Modiﬁed on 2/7/2007 - linked to #18 (ltien, ). (Entered: 01/29/2007)

01/29/2007

25 Agreed MOTION for Continuance Motion to Compel Production of Documents by Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, ﬁled. Motion Docket Date 2/20/2007. (Attachments: # 1 Proposed Order)(Adewale-Mendes, Rose) (Entered: 01/29/2007)

02/01/2007

26 ORDER granting 25 Agreed MOTION for Continuance Motion to Compel Production of Documents Motion Filing due by 2/28/2007.( Signed by Judge Frances H Stacy ) Parties notiﬁed.(ltrevino, ) (Entered: 02/05/2007)

02/16/2007 28 Joint MOTION for Protective Order by all parties, ﬁled. Motion Docket Date 3/8/2007. (Attachments: # 1 Proposed Order)(Adewale-Mendes, Rose) (Entered: 02/16/2007)

02/20/2007 29 ORDER granting 28 Motion for Protective Order.( Signed by Judge Ewing Werlein, Jr ) Parties notiﬁed.(jhancock) (Entered: 02/20/2007)

03/01/2007 30 NOTICE re: 19 MOTION to Compel Production of Documents by Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, ﬁled. (Adewale-Mendes, Rose) (Entered: 03/01/2007)

03/28/2007

31 MEMORANDUM AND ORDER granting in part and denying in part 18 Motion for Partial Summary Judgment.( Signed by Judge Ewing Werlein, Jr ) Parties notiﬁed. (jhancock) (Entered: 03/28/2007)

04/05/2007 32 OBJECTIONS To EEOC'S Proposed Instructions and Interrogatories, ﬁled by Geoscience Engineering & Testing Incorporated. (mkallie, ) (Entered: 04/05/2007)

04/05/2007 33 MOTION in Limine by Geoscience Engineering & Testing Incorporated, ﬁled.Motion Docket Date 4/25/2007. (bthomas, ) (Entered: 04/05/2007)

04/06/2007

34 Joint Proposed Pretrial Order by Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, ﬁled. (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit Plaintiff exhibit list# 2 Exhibit Defendant exhibit list# 3 Plaintiff witness list# 4 Plaintiff witness names# 5 Defendant witness list# 6 Defendant witness names)(Adewale-Mendes, Rose) (Entered: 04/06/2007)

04/06/2007 35 Proposed Jury Charge by Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, ﬁled.(AdewaleMendes, Rose) (Entered: 04/06/2007)

04/06/2007 36 Proposed Voir Dire Questions, ﬁled.(Adewale-Mendes, Rose) (Entered: 04/06/2007)

04/06/2007 37 PRETRIAL MEMORANDUM by Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, ﬁled. (Adewale-Mendes, Rose) (Entered: 04/06/2007)

04/06/2007 38 MOTION in Limine by Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, ﬁled.Motion Docket Date 4/26/2007. (Adewale-Mendes, Rose) (Entered: 04/06/2007)

04/23/2007 39 RESPONSE to 33 MOTION in Limine, ﬁled by Equal Employment Opportunity Commission. (Attachments: # 1 Proposed Order)(McFerren, Aimee) (Entered: 04/23/2007)

04/23/2007

40 MOTION to Strike 34 Proposed Pretrial Order, Defendant's Witnesses by Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, ﬁled. Motion Docket Date 5/14/2007. (Attachments: # 1 Proposed Order)(McFerren, Aimee) (Entered: 04/23/2007)

05/03/2007 41 Defendant's Opposed MOTION for Continuance of Docket Call by Geoscience

https://ecf.txsd.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/DktRpt.pl?550709240096154-L_1_0-1

4/6

5/31/2017

DC CM/ECF LIVE- US District Court-Texas Southern
Engineering & Testing Incorporated, ﬁled. Motion Docket Date 5/23/2007. (jhancock) (Entered: 05/03/2007)

05/03/2007

42 ORDER granting 41 MOTION for Continuance of Docket Call. Docket Call is RESET to 5/4/07 at 5:00 p.m. in Fifth Circuit Courtroom 11-D.( Signed by Judge Ewing Werlein, Jr ) Parties notiﬁed.(jhancock) (Entered: 05/03/2007)

05/03/2007

43 MOTION for Continuance of Case until Monday, May 14, 2007 by Geoscience Engineering & Testing Incorporated, ﬁled. Motion Docket Date 5/23/2007. (Attachments: # 1 Proposed Order)(ltrevino, ) (Entered: 05/04/2007)

05/04/2007

44 Minute Entry for proceedings held before Judge Ewing Werlein, Jr. DOCKET CALL held on 5/4/2007. The parties are in settlement negotiations, and will notify the Court by Wednesday, May 16, 2007, as to whether the case is settled in its entirety. If the case is completely settled, the parties will submit an order of dismissal or agreed judgment to the Court. If only the economic portion of the case is settled, the parties will notify the Case Manager if a Jury Trial is still required. The Case Manager will then notify the parties of what date the bench or jury trial is set once she hears from the parties on May 16, 2007. If the case proceeds to a Jury Trial, the parties are allowed 6 hours per side for direct and cross examination. Appearances: Rose Adewale-Mendes, Aimee Lynn McFerren, James Nathan Overstreet.(Court Reporter: M. Malone), ﬁled.(bthomas, ) (Entered: 05/07/2007)

05/04/2007 45 Proposed Voir Dire Questions, ﬁled. (Attachments: # 1 Proposed Order)(ltrevino, ) (Entered: 05/08/2007)

05/04/2007 46 CLERKS NOTICE on Mandatory Electronic Filing re: 45 Proposed Voir Dire Questions. Parties notiﬁed, ﬁled. (ltrevino, ) (Entered: 05/08/2007)

05/04/2007 53 Proposed Jury Charge by Geoscience Engineering & Testing Incorporated, ﬁled.(ltrevino, ) (Entered: 06/05/2007)

05/16/2007 05/16/2007

47 MOTION for Continuance by all plaintiffs, ﬁled. Motion Docket Date 6/5/2007. (Attachments: # 1 Proposed Order)(Adewale-Mendes, Rose) (Entered: 05/16/2007)
48 ORDER granting 47 Joint Motion for an Enlargement of Time. The parties shall notify the Court as to whether the case is settled in its entirety no later than noon on May 18, 2007 .( Signed by Judge Ewing Werlein, Jr ) Parties notiﬁed.(jhancock) (Entered: 05/17/2007)

05/17/2007

49 Agreed MOTION for entry of consent decree Judgment by all plaintiffs, ﬁled. Motion Docket Date 6/6/2007. (Attachments: # 1 Proposed Order Consent Decree# 2 Exhibit exhibit to decree)(Adewale-Mendes, Rose) (Entered: 05/17/2007)

05/17/2007

50 MOTION to Withdraw 49 Agreed MOTION for entry of consent decree Judgment by all plaintiffs, ﬁled. Motion Docket Date 6/6/2007. (Attachments: # 1 Proposed Order) (Adewale-Mendes, Rose) (Entered: 05/17/2007)

05/18/2007

51 Agreed MOTION for Entry of Consent Decree Judgment by Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, ﬁled. Motion Docket Date 6/7/2007. (Attachments: # 1 Proposed Order Consent Decree# 2 Exhibit)(Adewale-Mendes, Rose) (Entered: 05/18/2007)

05/18/2007

52 CONSENT DECREE: Granting 51 Agreed MOTION for Entry of Consent Decree Judgment. Case terminated on 05/18/2007.( Signed by Judge Ewing Werlein, Jr ) Parties notiﬁed.(jhancock) (Entered: 05/18/2007)

11/16/2007

54 MOTION for Order to Show Cause as to Why Defendant should not be held in contempt by Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, ﬁled. Motion Docket Date 12/6/2007. (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit Consent Decree# 2 Exhibit Letter of 5/23/07# 3 Exhibit Letter of

https://ecf.txsd.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/DktRpt.pl?550709240096154-L_1_0-1

5/6

5/31/2017
12/05/2007
12/11/2007 01/08/2008 01/11/2008 01/14/2008
01/15/2008 01/15/2008 02/08/2008 02/11/2008

DC CM/ECF LIVE- US District Court-Texas Southern
6/5/07# 4 Exhibit Letter of 6/22/07# 5 Exhibit Afﬁdavit in support of application and memorandum# 6 EEOC Memorandum in support of application for show cause order# 7 Proposed Order Order setting Hearing# 8 Proposed Order Order)(Adewale-Mendes, Rose) (Entered: 11/16/2007)
55 Unopposed MOTION for Continuance of Plaintiff's application for issuance of order to show cause why defendant should not be held in contempt by Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, ﬁled. Motion Docket Date 12/26/2007. (Attachments: # 1 Proposed Order to continue matter to January 7, 2008)(Adewale-Mendes, Rose) (Entered: 12/05/2007)
56 ORDER granting 55 Motion to Continue. The time for Defendant to respond to Plaintiff's application 54 is extended to 1/7/08.( Signed by Judge Ewing Werlein, Jr ) Parties notiﬁed. (jhancock) (Entered: 12/11/2007)
57 Unopposed MOTION for Continuance of Show Cause Hearing for Defendant's failure to comply with Decree. by Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, ﬁled. Motion Docket Date 1/28/2008. (Attachments: # 1 Proposed Order To continue show cause hearing to January 10, 2008.)(Adewale-Mendes, Rose) (Entered: 01/08/2008)
58 Unopposed MOTION for Continuance of Application for issuance of an order to show cause why Defendant should not be held in contempt. by Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, ﬁled. Motion Docket Date 1/31/2008. (Attachments: # 1)(Adewale-Mendes, Rose) (Entered: 01/11/2008)
59 CERTIFICATE of Conference re: 57 Unopposed MOTION for Continuance of Show Cause Hearing for Defendant's failure to comply with Decree., 58 Unopposed MOTION for Continuance of Application for issuance of an order to show cause why Defendant should not be held in contempt. by Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, ﬁled. (Adewale-Mendes, Rose) (Entered: 01/14/2008)
60 ORDER granting 57 Second Motion to Continue. The time for Defendant to respond to Plaintiff's application is extended to 1/10/08.( Signed by Judge Ewing Werlein, Jr ) Parties notiﬁed.(jhancock) (Entered: 01/15/2008)
61 ORDER granting 58 Third Motion to Continue. The time for Defendant to respond to Plaintiff's application is extended to 2/11/08.( Signed by Judge Ewing Werlein, Jr ) Parties notiﬁed.(jhancock) (Entered: 01/15/2008)
62 Unopposed MOTION to Withdraw 54 MOTION for Order to Show Cause as to Why Defendant should not be held in contempt by Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, ﬁled. Motion Docket Date 2/28/2008. (Attachments: # 1 Proposed Order) (Adewale-Mendes, Rose) (Entered: 02/08/2008)
63 ORDER granting 62 Plaintiff's Motion to Withdraw Its Show Cause Application.( Signed by Judge Ewing Werlein, Jr ) Parties notiﬁed.(jhancock) (Entered: 02/12/2008)

PACER Service Center

Transaction Receipt

05/31/2017 19:11:25

PACER Login: hs0328:2563377:0 Client Code:

Description: Docket Report Search Criteria: 4:05-cv-03365

Billable Pages: 5

Cost:

0.50

https://ecf.txsd.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/DktRpt.pl?550709240096154-L_1_0-1

6/6