. _ - - - - _ Case 2:03-cv-73829-GER Document 1 Filed .0.9-/.2-9-/2-0-0._ 3 . Page 1 of 5

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN
SOUTHERN DIVISION

EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY

)

COMMISSION,

)

)

Plaintiff,

)

)

v.

)

DAIMLER CHRYSLER CORPORATION,

)

)

Defendant.

)

)
---------------------------)

03- 73829
HONORABLE
CASE No~ERf.\LD ROSEN
COMPLAINT AND JURY TRIAL DEMAND
MAGISTRATE JUDGE D ONALD A. SCHE

NATURE OF THE ACTION

This is an action under Title I of the American With Disabilities Act of 1990 and Ti tIe I

of the Civil Rights Act of 1991, to correct unlawful employment practices on the badis of2~
. ';- "--'

......,...J

-- "

'./)

~

disability on behalf of Edward Olson ("Olson"), and other similarly situated individua'ls. c;::

, . "'I
':
The Equal Employment Opportunity alleges that Defendant, Daimler Chrys~er,

f'.l
-0
):>

. ..;-:'"'1

-, - :::::;J

Corporation (" Daimler Chrysler"), violated the American with Disabilities Act by failinlUo

.. ', i..,.n

reasonably accommodate and failing to hire Olson and other similarly situated individuals, and

used an unlawful qualification standard which had the effect of precluding individuals with

disabilities from employment.

JURISDICTION AND VENUE 1. Jurisdiction of this Court is invoked pursuant to 28 U.S.C.§§ 451,1331,1337, 1343 and 1345. This action is authorized and instituted pursuant to Section 107 (a) of the Americans With Disabilities Act of 1990 ("ADA"), 42 U.S.C. § 12117 (a), which incorporates by reference Sections 706(f)(1) and (3) of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 ("Title VII"),

Case 2:03-cv-73829-GER Document 1 Filed 09/29/2003 Page 2 of 5
42 U.S.C. §§ 2000e-5(f)(I) and (3), and pursuant to Section 102 of thc Civil Rights Act of 1991, as amended, 42 U.S.C. Section 1981 (A).
2. The employment practices hereafter alleged to be unlawful were committed in the Eastern District of Michigan, Southern Division.
PARTIES 3. The Plaintiff, Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (the "Commission"), is an agency of the United States of America charged with the administration, interpretation and enforcement of Title I of the ADA and is expressly authorized to bring this action by Section 107 (A) of the ADA, 42 U.S.C. § 1211 (a), which incorporates by reference Sections 706(f)(l) of Title VII, 42 U.S.C. § 20003-5(f)(1) and (3). 4. At all relevant times, Defendant was doing business in the State of Michigan and continuously had at least fifteen (15) employees/members. 5. At all relevant times, Defendant was continuously engaged in an industry affecting commerce within the meaning of Section 101(5) of the ADA, 42 U.S.C.§ 12111 (5), and Section 101 (7) of the ADA, 42 U.S.C. § 12111(7), which incorporates by reference Section 701(g) and (h) ofTitle VII, 42 U.S.C. § 2000e(g) and (h). 6. At all relevant times, Defendant was a covered entity under Section 101(2) of the ADA, 42 U.S.C. § 12111(2).
STATEMENT OF CLAIMS 7. More than thirty (30) days prior to the institution of this lawsuit, Olson filed a charge with the Commission alleging violations of Title 1of the ADA by Defendant Daimler Chrysler. All condition precedent to the institution of this lawsuit have been fulfilled. 8. Beginning in March, 2000, Defendant engaged in unlawful employment

Case 2:03-cv-73829-GER Document 1 Filed 09-/2-9/2-00-3 - -Pa-ge-3 -of 5~~~~.-~-~-~~-~
practices in violation of the ADA Sections 102(a), 102(b)(3)(A), 102(b)(5)(A) and 102 (b)(5)(B), 42 U.S.C. §§ 12112(a), 12112(b)(3)(A), 12112(b)(5)(A) and 12112 (b)(5)(B). The Defendant's practices include but are not limited to, failing to reasonably accommodate Olson and other similarly situated individuals for its entry level test, and failing to hire Olson and other similarly situated individuals.
9. Defendant also used a qualification standard as part of its entry level hiring process that screened out, or tended to screen out individuals with disabilities in violation of ADA Section 102 (b)(6), 42 USC §12112 (b)(6).
10. Olson and other similarly situated individuals are qualified individuals with a disability who were able to pelform the essential functions of the positions for which they applied with or without a reasonable accommodation.
11. The effect of the above-mentioned, unlawful employment practices has been to deprive Olson and similarly situated individuals of equal employment opportunities because of their disabilities.
12. The above-mentioned, unlawful employment practices were intentional. 13. The unlawful employment practices complained of in paragraph 8 above were done with malice or with reckless indifference to the federally protected rights of Olson and other similarly situated individuals.
PRAYER FOR RELTEF WHEREFORE, the Commission respectfully requests that this Court: A. Grant a permanent injunction enjoining the Defendant Employer, its officers, successors, assigns and all persons in active conccrt or participation with it, from cngaging in any unlawful employment practice which discriminates on the basis of disability, including

Case 2:03-cv-73829-GER Document 1 Filed 09/29/2003 Page 4 of 5

using qualification standards which preclude individuals with disabilitics from employment;

B. Order the Defendant Employer to institute and carry out policies, practices, and

programs which provide equal employment opportunities for individuals with disabilities, and

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

C. Order the Defendant Employer to provide training to its management employees

regarding disability discrimination and the ADA's requirements to provide a reasonable

accommodation to disabled cmployees;

D. Order the Defendant Employer to make whole Olson and other similarly situated

individuals by providing them with appropriate lost earnings and benefits, with pre-judgement

interest, in amounts to be proven at trial, and other affirmativc rclief necessary to eradicate the

effects of its unlawful employment practices;

E. Order Defendant Employer to make whole Olson and other similarly situated

individuals by providing compensation for past and future nonpecuniary losses resulting from the

unlawful practices complained of in paragraph 8 above in amounts to be proven at trial;

F.

Order Defendant Employer to pay Olson and other similarly situated individuals

punitive damages for the malicious or reckless conduct described in paragraph 8 above, in

amounts to be proven at trial;

G. Grant the Commission its costs in this action; and

H. GRANT such further relief as the Court deems necessary and proper.

Respectfully submitted,

ERIC S. DREIDAND General Counsel

JAMES L. LEE Deputy General Counsel

Ca~ s-e- - 2:- 03- -c- v-~ 73- 82- 9-- G- ER--- Do~cu-m- en-t - 1 --F- ile- d 0-9- /2- 9/2-0- 03--P-ag-e-5- of-5-------_l

DATE]

GWENDOLYN YOUNG REAMS Associate General Counsel
Regional Attorney
ROBERT DAWKINS Supervisory Trial Attorney
TRINA MENGESHA Trial Attorney
EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY COMMISSION Detroit District Office 477 Michigan Avenue. Room 865 Detroit. Michigan 48226 (313) 226-6701

 
 Case 2:03-cv-73829-GER Document 29 Filed 02/18/2005
- - - - CLOSED
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN
SOUTHERN DIVISION

Page 1 of 11

II

ORIGINAL

U.S. EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY COMMISSION,

Plaintiff,

Honorable Gerald Rosen

v.

Case No. 03-73829

DAIMLER CHRYSLER CORPORATION,

Defendant. --------------~/

STIPULATED ORDER OF DISMISSAL WITH PREJUDICE

The parties having stipulated to the relief granted herein, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the above-referenced civil action be and hereby is dismissed with prejudice and without an award of costs or attorneys' fees to any party.

i Il $.,\

~ ',. '

. -~ '",,,..;

Dated:_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ __

By: Trina R. Mengesha ( Attorney for Plaintiff
By:

~~cc~~~~~
FEB 1 4 Z005
CLERK'S OFFICE, OETROIT·PSG U.S. DISTRICT COURT

l
fEB 18 2005
CLERK'S OFFICE DETROIT

Case 2:03-cv-73829-GER Document 29 Filed 02/18/2005 Page 2 of 11
SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT 1. Plaintiff, the United States Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (the "Commission") commenced Case Number 03-73829 on September 29,2003 in the United States District Court for the Eastern District ofMichigan, Southern Division ("Complaint") alleging that the Defendant, Daimler Chrysler Corporation ("DCC") failed to accommodate the Charging Party, Edward Olson as well as Heather Bakehorn, and other similarly situated applicants for employment who requested reading accommodations for DCC's pre-employment hourly non-skilled hiring test, in violation of the Americans with Disabilities Act ("ADA"), 42 U.S.C. § 12101 et seq. The Commission further alleged that the pre-employment hourly non-skilled hiring test had the effect of unlawfully screening out applicants with learning disabilities in further violation ofthe ADA. DCC denies these allegations.
2. As a result of settlement discussions, the Commission and DCC have resolved their differences and have agreed that this action as well as charge No. 170-2004-01354 filed by Claimant Brian Gelesh should be settled by execution of this Settlement Agreement and by entry of an Order dismissing this case with prejudice. It is the intent of the parties that this Settlement Agreement be a final and binding settlement in full disposition of any and all claims alleged or which could have been alleged in the Complaint or in the Charges of Discrimination filed by Edward Olson, Charge No. 230-A1-0235, Brian Gelesh or by any other individuals making the same or similar claim.
STIPULATED FACTS 3. The Commission is the agency of the United States government authorized by the
1

Case 2:03-cv-73829-GER Document 29 Filed 02/18/2005 Page 3 of 11
ADA to investigate allegations of unlawful employment discrimination based upon disability, to bring civil actions to prohibit unlawful employment practices, and to seek relief for individuals affected by such practices.
4. DCC is an employer engaged in an industry affecting commerce within the meaning of Section 101(5) of the ADA, 42 U.S.C. § 12111(2), which incorporates by reference Sections 701 (g) and (h) ofTitie VII, 42 U.S.c. § 2000e (g) and (h). DCC had at least IS employees for 20 or more calendar weeks during the relevant period of time.
5. Pursuant to the ADA, the parties acknowledge the jurisdiction of the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Michigan (Southern Division) over the subject matter and parties to this case.
6. Venue is appropriate in the Eastern District of Michigan (Southern Division). For purposes ofthis matter and proceedings related to this Settlement Agreement only, DCC agrees that all statutory conditions precedent to the institution of this lawsuit have been fulfilled.
NON-ADMISSION 7. This Settlement Agreement, being entered into between the Commission and DCC, shall not constitute an adjudication or finding on the merits ofthis case and shall not be construed as an admission by DCC of any violation of the ADA or any other law, rule or regulation dealing with or in connection with equal employment opportunity. In fact, DCC expressly denies it has violated the ADA or any other law, rule or regulation dealing with or in connection with equal employment opportunity.
2

Case 2:03-cv-73829-GER Document 29 Filed 02/18/2005 Page 4 of 11
NON-DISCRIMINATION 8. Dce, its officers, agents, employees, successors, assigns and all persons in active concert or participation with them or any of them shall comply with the provisions ofthe ADA, 42 u.s.e. § 12101 et seq., with regard to disability discrimination.
NON-RETALIATION 9. DeC shall not take any action against any person which constitutes intimidation, retaliation, harassment, or interference with the exercise of such person's rights under the ADA because of the filing of Charge of Discrimination by Edward Olson, which forms the basis for the present case, or because such person gave testimony or assistance or participated in any manner in any investigation or proceeding in connection with this case under the ADA.
NON-MONETARY AND MONETARY RELIEF 10. Reasonable Accommodations: DeC agrees to provide reasonable accommodations for its hourly non-skilled hiring test to each reading disabled job applicant who (a) provides documentation establishing that he/she has a disability as that term is defined by the ADA and (b) makes a request that the test be read to them. Specifically, DeC will provide to such applicants a reader and/or audio tape to verbally read all instructions and written portions of the test, including the answer choices. DeC will continue to engage in the interactive process with disabled applicants to determine and provide a reasonable and appropriate accommodation. Dec will also consider and provide reasonable accommodations on a case-by-case basis during employment as required by the ADA.
11. Training: DeC agrees that it shall provide a mandatory training program to all
3

Case 2:03-cv-73829-GER Document 29 Filed 02/18/2005 Page 5 of 11
individuals who make accommodation decisions on DCC's behalfin connection with the hourly nonskilled test taking process. The training shall focus on the requirements of the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990, as amended and will focus on an employer's duty to reasonably accommodate under the statute. DCC shall provide sign-in sheets, with dates of training, to the EEOC within 180 days of the effective date of this Settlement Agreement.
12. Job Offers: DCC agrees that Edward Olson, Heather Bakehom, Timothy Adkins, Kenneth Brandon, Brian Gelesh, Gary Howe, Antoine McCoy, Jeffrey Piwowar, Carlos Romero, Daniel Steck, Matthew Tyler and Candace Vaughn ("the Candidates") will be given an opportunity to take the hourly non-skilled hiring test within the next 60 days, with the assistance of a reader ("Special Test Session"). Any Candidate who successfully passes the test battery during this onetime Special Test Session and also successfully completes the remainder of the hiring process (employment history and background check, an assessment exercise, drug testing) (sometimes referred to here as "Successful Candidate") will be placed in the same Candidate Bank in the same order that he/she would have been placed in had he/she successfully completed the test battery on the dates and locations indicated on attached Exhibit A. Following the execution of this Settlement Agreement by the EEOC and the Candidate's execution of a Full and Final Release between DCC and the Candidate, DCC will (a) extend conditional job offers to each Successful Candidate who would have already been hired by DCC at the time this Settlement Agreement is entered, subject to the results of a pre-employment physical examination and (b) subsequently extend conditional job offers to all other Successful Candidates based on the hiring order in which he/she would have been placed had he/she successfully passed the test battery on the respective dates set forth on Exhibit A, subject to the results of a pre-employment physical examination and the results ofa drug screen test
4

Case 2:03-cv-73829-GER Document 29 Filed 02/18/2005 Page 6 of 11
(which will be administered only if more than six months have elapsed since the Successful Candidate previously took a drug screen test).
13. Monetary Compensation: Following the execution ofthis Settlement Agreement, and a Successful Candidate's completion of the hiring process and execution of a Full and Final Release, DCC will pay monetary damages to the individuals in the amounts set forth opposite their names in column I on Exhibit B as non-economic compensatory damages. Each individual who is not a Successful Candidate but who signs a Full and Final Release, will receive the alternative amount set forth in column II on Exhibit B opposite their name as non-economic compensatory damages. For any amount designated as non-economic damages, DCC will issue each individual a Form 1099 for tax purposes. Column III on Exhibit B reflects an agreed upon amount of economic damages for certain Candidates. Only Successful Candidates who execute a Full and Final Release will be eligible to receive the amount set forth opposite their name in Column III and such amount will be subject to applicable federal and state tax withholdings.
POSTING OF NOTICE 14. DCC agrees that it shall post a copy of the Notice attached as Exhibit C in a conspicuous location at each of the facilities which test hourly non-skilled applicants. The notice shall be posted for one (1) year from the date the Settlement Agreement is fully executed. Should the posted notice become defaced, marred or otherwise made unreadable, DCC agrees to post a readable copy of the notice as soon as practical thereafter.
DISPUTE RESOLUTION AND COMPLIANCE 15. Prior to seeking any judicial relief to enforce any of the terms of this Settlement Agreement, the parties shall engage in a good faith effort to resolve any dispute concerning
5

Case 2:03-cv-73829-GER Document 29 Filed 02/18/2005 Page 7 of 11
compliance with the Settlement Agreement. Any party seeking court review of a matter shall be required to give fifteen (IS) business days notice to the other party before initiating an action seeking such review.
REPORTING 16. One hundred and eighty days (180) after the entry of this Settlement Agreement, DCC shall submit to the Commission a report of the steps it has taken to comply with this Agreement. Specifically, DCC shall report the names andjob titles of each individual offered ajob as part ofthis agreement. DCC shall also provide the EEOC with relevant documentation, including test results, regarding why it did not hire any of the individuals whose names appear on Exhibit B in the event any of the individuals are not offered positions of employment. Such documentation will include evidence that non-disabled applicants were rejected for the same reason and evidence supporting the determination not to hire the non-disabled applicant. DCC's report shall also note its accommodation efforts, including accommodation requests received by the individuals encompassed by this Settlement Agreement, and the accommodation provided, if any. DCC's report shall be submitted to: Adele Rapport, Regional Attorney, EEOC, Detroit District Office, 477 Michigan Avenue, Suite 865, Patrick V. McNamara Federal Building, Detroit, Michigan 48226.
COURT COSTS AND ATTORNEY FEES 17. Each party shall bear its own court costs and attorney fees.
MISCELLANEOUS 18. If any provision(s) of this Agreement is found to be unlawful, only the specific provision(s) in question shall be affected and the other provisions will remain in full force and effect.
6

Case 2:03-cv-73829-GER Document 29 Filed 02/18/2005 Page 8 of 11

19. The terms of this Settlement Agreement shall be binding upon the present and future owners, officers, directors, employees, creditors, agents, trustees, administrators, successors, representatives, and assigns of DCC.
20. This Settlement Agreement and the Full and Final Releases, signed between the individuals and DCC, constitute the entire agreement and commitments of the parties. Any modifications to this Settlement Agreement must be mutually agreed upon and memorialized in a writing signed by DCC and the Commission.

EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY COMMISSION
Eric S. Dreiband General Counsel
James Lee Deputy General Counsel

DAIMLER CHRYSLER CORPORATION
VERCRUYSSE MURRAY & CALZONE,
Attorneys for DCC

Adele Rapport Regional Attorney
Robert Dawkins Supervisory Trial Attorney
Trina R. Mengesha Trial Attorney Attorneys for Plaintiff
Detroit District Office Patrick V. McNamara Federal Building 477 Michigan Ave., Room 865 Detroit, MI 48226 (313) 226-670 I
Dated: J./ 'i
7

Bingham Farms, MI 48025 (248) 540-8019
K.C. Hortop Co-Counsel fo DAIMLERCHRYSLER CORP 1000 Chrysler Drive.
~(/as Auburn Hill; MI 48326
Dated: I •

Case 2:03-cv-73829-GER Document 29 Filed 02/18/2005 Page 9 of 11

EXHIBIT A

Name Timothy Adkins Heather Bakehom Kenneth Brandon Brian Gelesh Gary Howe Antoine McCoy Edward Olson Jeffrey Piwowar Carlos Romero Daniel Steck Matthew Tyler Candace Vaughn

Date July 10, 2000 Next test date in Indiana March 26, 2002 August 4, 2003 July 31, 2002 December 3,2002 July 10, 2000 March 17, 2003 July 10, 2000 May 26,2000 March 31, 2000 November 6, 2002

Candidate Bank Detroit Temporary Indiana Full-Time Portland Full-Time Delaware Full-Time Detroit Part-Time Detroit Full-Time Detroit Full-Time Detroit Full-Time Toledo Full-Time Toledo Full-Time Detroit Part-Time Detroit Part-Time

Case 2:03-cv-73829-GER Document 29 Filed 02/18/2005 Page 10 of 11

Name Timothy Adkins Heather Bakehom Kenneth Brandon Brian Gelesh Gary Howe Antoine McCoy Edward Olson Jeffrey Piwowar Carlos Romero Daniel Steck Matthew Tyler Candace Vaughn

EXHIBITB

COLUMN I $3,000 $10,000 $10,000 $10,000 $10,000 $10,000 $10,000 $10,000 $10,000 $10,000 $10,000 $3,000

COLUMN II $1,000 $5,000 $5,000 $5,000 $5,000 $5,000 $5,000 $5,000 $5,000 $5,000 $5,000 $1,000

COLUMN III $10,000
-
-
-
$10,000
-

Case 2:03-cv-73829-GER Document 29 Filed 02/18/2005 Page 11 of 11

EXHIBITC
NOTICE
This notice is being posted as part of the remedy agreed to by the United States Equal Employment Opportunity Commission and Daim1erChrysler Corporation pursuant to a Settlement Agreement, and to info= you of your rights gu;rranteed by the federal law under the Americans With Disabilities Act, 42 U.S.c. § 12101 et. seq. ("ADA"). The ADA prohibits discrimination against any employee on the basis of disability with regard to any te= or condition of employment including hiring, layoff, recall, promotion, discharge, pay and fringe benefits or in retaliation for the opposition to unlawful employment practices.
The United States Equal Employment Opportunity Commission is the federal agency which investigates charges of unlawful employment discrimination and, if necessaty, brings lawsuits in federal court to enforce Title I (the employment provision) of the ADA
DaimlerChrysler Corporation supports and will comply vtith this federal law in all respects. Daimler Chrysler further agrees that it will provide reasonable accommodations to job applicants in its hiring process, including but not limited to, its hourly non-skilled hiring test.

Dated: _ _ _ _ __

DAIMLERCHRYSLER CORPORATION

 
 CM/ECF - U.S. District Court:mied - Docket Report

https://ecf.mied.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/DktRpt.pl?635714735396838-L_3...

U.S. District Court Eastern District of Michigan (Detroit) CIVIL DOCKET FOR CASE #: 2:03-cv-73829-GER

CLOSED, DAS

EEOC v. DaimlerChrysler Corp Assigned to: Judge Gerald E Rosen Demand: $0
Plaintiff Equal Employment Opportunity Commission
V. Defendant DaimlerChrysler Corporation

Date Filed: 09/29/2003 Date Terminated: 02/18/2005 Jury Demand: Plaintiff Nature of Suit: 442 Civil Rights: Jobs Jurisdiction: U.S. Government Plaintiff
represented by Trina R. Mengesha Equal Employment Opportunities Commission 477 Michigan Avenue Suite 865 Detroit, MI 48226 313-226-4600 Fax: 313-226-2778 Email: trina.mengesha@eeoc.gov LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
represented by David B. Calzone Vercruysse, Murray, 31780 Telegraph Road Suite 200 Bingham Farms, MI 48025-3469 248-540-8019 Fax: 248-540-8059 Email: dcalzone@vmclaw.com LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
Gregory V. Murray Vercruysse, Murray, (Bingham Farms) 31780 Telegraph Road Suite 200 Bingham Farms, MI 48025-3469 248-540-8019 Email: gmurray@vmclaw.com LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

1 of 4

6/7/2007 3:13 PM

CM/ECF - U.S. District Court:mied - Docket Report

https://ecf.mied.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/DktRpt.pl?635714735396838-L_3...

Date Filed 09/29/2003 10/23/2003 10/23/2003 10/31/2003 11/12/2003 11/14/2003 11/14/2003 12/01/2003 12/04/2003
01/06/2004
02/04/2004 02/20/2004

Kenneth C. Hortop Chrysler Motors Corporation 1000 Chrysler Drive Auburn Hills, MI 48326-2757 248-512-4088 Fax: 248-512-4088 LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

#

Docket Text

1 COMPLAINT with jury demand - Receipt # USA (DT) (Entered: 09/30/2003)
2 ANSWER by defendant DaimlerChrysler Corp to complaint [1-1] with proof of service (DT) (Entered: 10/27/2003)
2 AFFIRMATIVE defenses by defendant DaimlerChrysler Corp (DT) (Entered: 10/27/2003)
3 NOTICE of setting scheduling conference for 11:15 am on 12/1/03 (DT) (Entered: 11/03/2003)
4 APPEARANCE for defendant DaimlerChrysler Corp of attorneys Gregory V. Murray, David B. Calzone with proof of service (DT) (Entered: 11/13/2003)
5 STATEMENT of disclosure of corporate affiliations and financial interests by defendant DaimlerChrysler Corp (DT) (Entered: 11/18/2003)
6 APPEARANCE for EEOC of attorney Trina R. Mengesha with proof of service (DT) (Entered: 11/18/2003)
SCHEDULING conference held - Judge Gerald E. Rosen (sf) (Entered: 12/02/2003)
7 PRETRIAL scheduling order by Judge Gerald E. Rosen - setting deadline for discovery for 5/28/04 , r setting deadline for expert witness list for 5/14/04 , setting deadline for witness list for 6/11/04 , setting deadline for filing dispositive motions for 6/30/04 , setting deadline for final pretrial order for 11/12/04 , setting final pretrial conference for 10:00 11/18/04 , setting civil jury trial for DEC 2004 (DT) (Entered: 12/09/2003)
8 ORDER by Judge Gerald E. Rosen with stipulation, setting deadline for responses to defendants first set of interrogatories for 1/16/04 , setting deadline for plaintiff's first set of interrogatories and requests for production of documents for 1/30/04 [EOD Date: 1/8/04] (ew) (Entered: 01/08/2004)
9 STIPULATION AND ORDER regarding discovery Signed by Judge Gerald E Rosen. (NHoll, ) (Entered: 02/11/2004)
10 MOTION to Compel by DaimlerChrysler Corporation. (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit 1-6# 2 Document Continuation)(NHoll, ) (Entered: 02/24/2004)

2 of 4

6/7/2007 3:13 PM

CM/ECF - U.S. District Court:mied - Docket Report

https://ecf.mied.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/DktRpt.pl?635714735396838-L_3...

02/26/2004 03/05/2004 03/08/2004 03/09/2004
05/10/2004 05/17/2004 05/20/2004
06/03/2004 08/19/2004 09/08/2004 09/10/2004 09/15/2004 09/23/2004 09/23/2004 10/07/2004 10/08/2004

11 STIPULATION AND ORDER Regarding Discovery Signed by Judge Gerald E Rosen. (LHack, ) (Entered: 03/05/2004)
12 ORDER REFERRING MOTION to Magistrate Judge Scheer: 10 MOTION to Compel filed by DaimlerChrysler Corporation Signed by Judge Gerald E Rosen. (DTyle, ) (Entered: 03/16/2004)
14 AGREED PROTECTIVE ORDER Signed by Judge Gerald E Rosen. (DTyle, ) (Entered: 03/23/2004)
13 ORDER deeming 10 MOTION to Compel filed by DaimlerChrysler Corporation withdrawn Motions terminated: 10 MOTION to Compel filed by DaimlerChrysler Corporation. Signed by Magistrate Judge Donald A Scheer. (DTyle, ) (Entered: 03/23/2004)
15 MOTION to Amend 7 Scheduling Order by Equal Employment Opportunity Commission. (DTyle, ) (Entered: 05/13/2004)
16 STIPULATED ORDER re: discovery. Signed by Honorable Gerald E Rosen. (CGre, ) (Entered: 05/19/2004)
17 SCHEDULING ORDER: Motions terminated: 15 MOTION to amend scheduling order 7 filed by Equal Employment Opportunity Commission. Final Pretrial Conference set for 3/10/2005 10:00 AM; Trial set for April 2005 and Dispositive Motion Cut-off set for 10/29/2004 Signed by Honorable Gerald E Rosen. (Refer to image for additional dates)(DTyle, ) (Entered: 05/24/2004)
18 STIPULATION AND ORDER extending time Signed by Honorable Gerald E Rosen. (DTyle, ) (Entered: 06/08/2004)
19 STIPULATED ORDER regarding extension of time to answer. Signed by Honorable Gerald E Rosen. (DTyle, ) (Entered: 08/23/2004)
20 JOINT MOTION to Amend Scheduling Order by parties. (LHack, ) (Entered: 09/09/2004)
22 ORDER to Extend Time to Compel Answers to Second Set of Discovery Requests to 9/30/04. Signed by Honorable Gerald E Rosen. (LHack, ) (Entered: 09/16/2004)
21 NOTICE TO APPEAR: Status Conference set for 10/14/2004 10:00 AM before Honorable Gerald E Rosen. (LSau, ) (Entered: 09/15/2004)
Set Deadlines/Hearings: Scheduling Conference set for 10/7/2004 10:30 AM before Honorable Gerald E Rosen. (LSau, ) (Entered: 09/23/2004)
23 Letter from Attorney Gregory V. Murray confirming the new status conference date (DTyle, ) (Entered: 09/23/2004)
Minute Entry -Status Conference held on 10/7/2004 before Honorable Gerald E Rosen. (LSau, ) (Entered: 10/07/2004)
24 AMENDED SCHEDULING ORDER: Motion terminated: 20 MOTION to Amend scheduling order Final Pretrial Settlement Conference set for 8/18/2005 10:00 AM; Dispositive Motion Cut-off set for 3/30/2005; Trial set for 9/1/2005 and Discovery due by 2/28/2005. Signed by Honorable Gerald E Rosen. (Refer to

3 of 4

6/7/2007 3:13 PM

CM/ECF - U.S. District Court:mied - Docket Report

https://ecf.mied.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/DktRpt.pl?635714735396838-L_3...

12/02/2004 12/21/2004 01/14/2005 01/26/2005
02/18/2005

image for additional dates)(DTyle, ) (Entered: 10/14/2004)
25 STIPULATED ORDER extending time for response. Signed by Honorable Gerald E Rosen. (DTyle, ) (Entered: 12/09/2004)
26 MOTION to Compel Discovery by Equal Employment Opportunity Commission. (DTyle, ) (Entered: 12/27/2004)
27 STIPULATED ORDER extending discovery response time and time to respond to plaintiff's motion to compel Signed by Honorable Gerald E Rosen. (DTyle, ) (Entered: 01/18/2005)
28 ORDER to Extend Discovery Responses and time to Respond to 26 MOTION to Compel filed by Equal Employment Opportunity Commission,. Responses to Motion due by 2/4/2005. Signed by Honorable Gerald E Rosen. (LHack, ) (Entered: 01/27/2005)
29 STIPULATED ORDER of dismissal with prejudice. Signed by Honorable Gerald E Rosen. (DPer, ) (Entered: 02/22/2005)

PACER Service Center

Transaction Receipt

06/07/2007 16:14:43

PACER Login:

hs0328

Client Code:

Description:

Docket Report

Search Criteria:

Billable Pages: 2

Cost:

eeoc 2:03-cv-73829-GER 0.16

4 of 4

6/7/2007 3:13 PM