Case 2:05-cv-00250 Document 1 Filed in TXSD on 05/18/05 Page 1 of 7

SouUthneirtendDSistatrtiacltCOOfd,..
FILED

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS
CORPUS CHRISTI DIVISION

MAY 182005
Michael N. Milby. Clark of c.t

EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY

§

COMMISSION,

§

§

Plaintiff,

§

§

v.

§

§

PHOENIX INDUSTRIAL SERVICE, INC.,

§

§

and

§

§

PHOENIX SERVICES,

§

§

Defendants.

§

--------------------------------§

COMPLAINT CIVIL ACTION NO. JURY TRIAL DEMANDED

NATURE OF THE ACTION

1. This is an action under Title vn ofthe 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

race, Black and to provide appropriate relief to Milford Topsy, who was adversely affected by the

unlawful practices. While employed by Defendant Phoenix Industrial Service, Inc. and Phoenix

Services (collectively "Defendant"), Mr. Topsy was subjected to discriminatory treatment because

of his race, Black. The discriminatory treatment included being repeatedly called racial slurs and,

being threatened with a noose. Defendant discharged Mr. Topsy on March 30,2004 in retaliation for

opposing the racially hostile working environment.

JURISDICTION AND VENUE

2. Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §§ 451, 1331, 1337, 1343 and 1345, the United States District

1

Case 2:05-cv-00250 Document 1 Filed in TXSD on 05/18/05 Page 2 of 7
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 seg. ("Title VII"), and Section 102 ofthe Civil Rights Act of 1991, 42 U.S.c. § 1981a.
3. The unlawful employment practices alleged in this complaint were committed within the jurisdiction ofthe United States District Court for the Southern District ofTexas, Corpus Christi Division. Venue is appropriate in this court.
PARTIES 4. Plaintiff, the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (the "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(f)(l) and (3) of Title VII, 42 U.S.C. § 2000e-5(f)(l) and (3). 5. Defendant Phoenix Industrial Service, Inc. is a Texas corporation now doing business (and has continuously been doing business) in the State ofTexas, the Cities ofLa Porte and Corpus Christi, Texas, and has continuously had more than 15 employees at all times relevant to this cause of action. 6. Defendant Phoenix Services is a Texas company now doing business (and has continuously been doing business) in the State of Texas, the Cities of La Porte and Corpus Christi, Texas, and has continuouslyhad more than 15 employees at all times relevant to this cause ofaction. 7. Collectively, at all relevant times, Phoenix Industrial Service, Inc. and Phoenix Services have 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).
2

Case 2:05-cv-00250 Document 1 Filed in TXSD on 05/18/05 Page 3 of 7

STATEMENT OF CLAIMS

8. More than thirty days prior to the institution ofthis lawsuit, Milford Topsy filed with

the Commission a charge 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 attempts to conciliate the claims.

9

Since at least March 22, 2004, Defendant engaged in unlawful employment policies

and practices in Corpus Christi, Texas in violation of Sections 703(a)(1) of Title Vll, 42 U.S.C. §

2000e-2(a)(l) and 704 of Title VII, 42 U.S.C. § 2000e-3.

10. Defendant subjected Milford Topsy to a racially hostile working environment because

ofhis race, Black. The racially hostile working environment included being repeatedly called racial

slurs and being threatened with a noose because ofhis race, Black. Defendant discharged Mr. Topsy

on March 30, 2004 in retaliation for his opposition to the racially hostile working environment.

11. The effect of the practices complained of above has been to deprive Milford Topsy

ofequal employment opportunities and otherwise adversely affect his status as an employee because

of his race, Black.

12. The unlawful employment practices of which the Commission complains in the

preceding paragraphs were intentional.

13. The unlawful employment practices complained ofin the preceding paragraphs were

done with malice or with reckless indifference to the federally protected rights of Milford Topsy.

PRAYER FOR RELIEF

14. Wherefore, the Commission respectfully requests that this Court:

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

3

Case 2:05-cv-00250 Document 1 Filed in TXSD on 05/18/05 Page 4 of 7
and all persons in active concert or participation with them, from engaging in any employment practice which discriminates on the basis of race; B. Grant a permanent injunction enjoining Defendant, its officers, successors, assigns, and all persons in active concert or participation with them, from engaging in any employment practice which discriminates on the basis ofopposition to discriminatory practices; C. Order Defendant to institute and carry out policies, practices, and programs which provide equal employment opportunities for applicants and employees regardless of their race, and which eradicate the effects of its past and present unlawful employment practices; D. Order Defendant to make whole Milford Topsy, by providing appropriate backpay, including all bonuses; and by providing compensation for any other pecuniary losses, past and future, including out-of-pocket such as job search expenses and insurance expenses in amounts to be proved at trial; E. Order Defendant to provide Milford Topsy, compensation for past and future nonpecuniary losses reSUlting from the unlawful practices complained of above, including emotional pain, suffering, inconvenience, mental anguish, and loss of enjoyment of life, in amounts to determined at trial; F. Order other affirmative relief necessary to eradicate the effects of Defendant's unlawful employment practices; G. Order Defendant to pay punitive damages, in amounts to be determined at trial, for its malicious and reckless conduct;
4

Case 2:05-cv-00250 Document 1 Filed in TXSD on 05/18/05 Page 5 of 7
H. Award pre-judgment interest and post-judgment interest on all amounts recovered;
I. Grant such further relief as the Court deems necessary and proper in the public
interest;
J. Award the Commission its costs ofthis action.
JURY DEMAND
The Commission requests a jury trial on all questions of fact raised by its complaint.
Respectfully submitted,
Eric S. Dreiband General Counsel
James L. Lee Deputy General Counsel
Gwendolyn Young Reams Associate General Counsel
Equal Employment Opportunity Commission 1801 L Street, N.W. Washington, D.C. 20507
James Sacher Regional Attorney
/Rudy~ ~ustal@ ta ? Senior Trial Attorney Attorney-in-Charge Admission I.D. No. 11850 Texas Bar No. 19523560 EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY COMMISSION Houston District Office 1919 Smith Street, 7th Floor Houston, Texas 77002
5

Case 2:05-cv-00250 Document 1 Filed in TXSD on 05/18/05 Page 6 of 7 Telephone: (7l3) 209-3400 Facsimile: (7l3) 209-3402
6

JS 44

Case 2:05-cv-00250 Document 1 Filed in TXSD on 05/18/05 Page 7 of 7

(Rev. 07/89)

CIVIL COVER SHEET

The JS 44 civil cover sheet and the infonnation contained herein n<,~ler replace nor supplement the filing and service of pleadings or other pap•.s as required by law, except as provided by local rules of coun. This fonn,

approved by the Judicial Conference of the Vnited States in September 1974, is reqUIred for the use of the Clerk of Coun for the purpose of inittating the CIvil docket sheet. (SEE INSTRUCTIONS ON TIlE REVERSE OF THE FORM.)

I(a) PLAINTIFFS
EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY COMMISSION

DEFENDANTS
PHOENIX INDUSTRIAL SERVICE, INC. AND PHOENIX SERVICES

(b) COUNTY OF RESIDENCE OF FIRST LISTED PLAINTIFF _ __
(EXCEPT IN V S. PLAINT[FF CASES)

COUNTY OF RESIDENCE OF FIRST LISTED DEFENDANT _ _ __ (IN V.S. PLAINTIFF CASES ONLy)
NOTE: IN LAND CONDEMNATION CASES, VSE THE LOCATION OF THE TRACT OF LAND INVOLVED

(c) ATTORNEYS (FIRM NAME, ADDRESS, AND TELEPHONE NUMBER)
Rudy Sustaita, Senior Trial Attorney EEOC-Houston District Office 1919 Smith Street, 7th Floor Houston, Texas 77002 (713) 209-3400

ATTORNEYS (IF KNOWN)

II. BASIS OF JURISDICTION

(PLACE AN x IN ONE BOX ONLy)

[xlI u.s. Government
Plaintiff
[) 2 U.S. Government Defendant

[] 3 Federal Question (V S. Government Not a Party)
[] 4 Diversity (IndIcate CitizenshIp of Parties m Item I\l)

III. CITIZENSHIP OF PRINCIPAL PARTIES (PLACEANxINONEBOX

(For Diversity Cases Only)

FOR PLAINTlF'F AND ONE BOX FOR DEFENDANT)

PTF DEF

PTF DEF

Citizen ofThis State []l [] I Incorporated or Principal Place [ ] 4 [] 4

of Business in This State

Citizen of Another State []2 [] 2 Incorporated and Principal Place [ ] 5 [] 5

of Business in Another State

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

[]6 []6

IV. CAUSE OF ACTION (CITE TIlE us CIVIL STATUTE UNDER WIllCH YOU ARE FILING AND WRITE A BRIEF STA'fEMENT OF CAUSE 00 NOT CITE JURlSDlCTiONAL SThTUTES UNLESS DIVERSITY)
Defendant subjected Milford Topsy to discriminatory treatment including being repeatedly called racial slurs and being threatened with a noose. Defendant discharged Mr. Topsy on March 30, 2004 in retaliation for opposing the racially hostile working environment.

V NATURE OF SUIT (PLACEANxlN ONE BOX ONLy)

CONTRACT

TORTS

[] 110 In,,",,_ [] 120 M.nn, [] 130 M,ll", Aot [] 140 Nep.O\lab\e In.trument
[] ~9~:::::=~ent &
[] 151 M"',~.. AO\
[] J~~::k:~~:=ns)
(] ~~.!.~·:",a::fi~Ov<rpal"""tof
[] 160 Stocldwldeno' Swta
[J 190 Otbe< Contract
[] 195 CO
REAL PROPERTY
[] 210 Land Condemn.toon [] 220 F""",I",,,", [] 230 Rent Lease & Ejectment [] 240 To", to Land [] 245 Tort Prod",1 bab,Itty [] 290 hll Othe< Real Property

PERSONAL INJURY
[] 310 AupI.ne [] 315 Auplome Product Luob,Itty [] 320 ",..ult. L,bel It Siomde< [] 330 Federal Employers' LlabdJty [] 340 M.n.. [] 345 Manne Product LlabJilty [] 350 M""" Vduole [] 355 M_ Velucle Product
Liability [] 360 Othe< P"""",IlnjWY
CIVIL RIGHTS
[] 441 Votong
[X] 442 EmpI"""""t
[] 443 H"""""A""""""",,.oru [] 444 Weir...
[] 440 Other CIVIl Rights

PERSONAL INJURY
[]36~=::--
[] 36t':::;::IInJWY--Producl
[] 36~::::tyonalInjWY
PERSONAL PROPERTY
(] 370 Otbe< F..ud [] 371 TruthonLendmg [] 380 00", Pen.....1Property Damage
[] ~!~'I~operty Domas' 1'",dUOl
PRISONER PETITIONS [] 510 Motions to Vacate Sentence
Habeas Corpus
[J 530 Genenol
[] 535 Death P"",Ity [] 540 M.ndam"," Othe< [] 550 Otbe<

FORFEITUREIPENALTY
[] 610 Asn'uI.... [] 620 Otbe< Food .. DIU(!
[] ~~iI~~~8~"Zure of
[] 630 L'q"'" Law. [] 640 R R& T"",k (] 650 Auim. R... [] 660 CeoUpabooai SafotylHealth
(] 690
LABOR
[J 71 0 Faa Labor StandAnb Aot
[] no LaborlMgml R.tab"". [] 711'n~r:::: Reportmg
[] 740 RaIlway Laoo, Act
[J 790 Othe< Labor bto8'toon [J 791;mpi Ret Inc Seounty

BANKRUPTCY [] 422 hppeal 28 usc 158 [] 423 W,!hdrawaI28 usc 157
PROPERTY RIGHTS
[] 820 Copynghta [] 830 Patent [] 840 T",dcmatk
SOCIAL SECURITY
[] 861 HlA(I195!l) [] 862 Black LImg (923) [] 863 DlWC/DIWW (405(g») [] 864 SSID T,~, XVI [] 865 RSI (405(g»
FEDERAL TAX SUITS
[] or Il7~~:~es (U S PlaUluff
[] 871 IRS-Thud Party 26 USC 7609

OTHER STATUTES
[] 400 Slate Reappomonment
[] 410 Anb_ [] 430 Bomkund Bonlong [] 450 C<>tnmetWlCC Ratufel< [] 460 Deporu.bon
[] 47JJ Racket= Infl~ and Cotrupt garuzab,,", [] 810 ..1"",,,,, SeMoe [] ~unto~iC<munO<hb'"
[] 87~2~~",,:~hall""
[] 891 Asnculluntl Acta [] 892 Eo:ononuc SlAboItzab.., Acl [] 893 Envoronmcntal Ma.... [] 894 Energy All""".,," Aot [] 895 F...oomofInfonnabonAct
[] Wler-=Jl~~9=:\lon
[] 950 ConstitutIOnality of State Statute. [] 890 Oiheo' Statu!my Acb"",

VI. ORIGIN
[X] I Origmal
Proceedmg

(PLACE AN X IN ONE BOX ONLY)

[] 2 Removed from

[] 3 Remanded from

State Coun

Appellate Coun

[] 4 Remstated or Reopened

Transferred from [] S another district (specdy)

VII. REQUESTED IN

CHECK IF THIS [S A CLASS ACTION

COMPLAINT:

[] VNDERF.RCP 23

DEMANDS

VIII. RELATED CASE S IF ANY (Seo""UUcb""')

SIGNATURE OF AITORNEYOF REC

Appeal to District

[] 6 Multidistrict

[] 7 Judge from

Llttgation

Magistrate Judgment

Check YES orlly if demanded m complamt:
[X] YES [) NO

DOCKET NUMBER

 
 CaCsaese2:20:50-5c-vc-v0-002052050DocDuomcuemnte1n8t 17F-2iled iFnilTedXS0D7/2o1n/20080/165/06PaPgeag1eo1f o10f 8

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS
CORPUS CHRISTI DIVISION

EQUAL EMPLOYMENT

§

OPPORTUNITY COMMISSION,

§

§

Plaintiff,

§

v.

§ C.A. NO. 2:0S-CV-002S0

§

PHOENIX INDUSTRIAL SERVICE, §

INC., and PHOENIX SERVICES, I §

§

Defendant. § JURY TRIAL DEMANDED

CONSENT DECREE

The Plaintiff, Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (the "Commission" or

EEOC"), has alleged that Defendant Phoenix Industrial Service, Inc. and Phoenix

Services (collectively "Defendant") discriminated against Milford Topsy ("Charging

Party") because of his race, Black, and retaliated against him for complaining of

harassment in violation of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, as amended.

Defendant has denied these allegations and specifically denies engaging in any

discriminatory or retaliatory employment practices. Neither the Defendant's consent to

the entry of this Consent Decree nor any of the terms set forth in it shall be construed as

an admission by Defendant of any liability of unlawful conduct.

In the interests of resolving this matter, to avoid the expense of protracted

litigation, and as a result of having engaged in extensive negotiations, the parties have

agreed that this action should be finally resolved by entry of this Consent Decree.

CaCsaese2:20:50-5c-vc-v0-002052050DocDuomcuemnte1n8t 17F-2iled iFnilTedXS0D7/2o1n/20080/165/06PaPgeag2eo2f 1o0f 8
The parties stipulate to the jurisdiction of the Court and waive a hearing and the entry of findings of fact and conclusions of law.
IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED: 1. Defendant contends that it did not engage in any illegal or improper employment practices. As such, Defendant agrees that it will not engage in any employment practices that have the purpose or effect of discriminating against any individual with respect to compensation, terms, conditions or privileges of employment because of an individual's race as prohibited by Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, as amended, and will not retaliate against any individual or retaliate in any manner against any individual because he or she has made a charge, testified, assisted, or participated in any manner in the investigation by the Commission or court proceeding in connection with this lawsuit 2. This Consent Decree is entered in full and complete settlement of any and all claims raised or which could have been raised arising out of or contained in EEOC Charge No. 36B-2004-00172. This Consent Decree is further entered in full and complete settlement of any and all claims raised or which could have been raised by the EEOC arising out of or contained in Civil Action No. 2:0S-CV-002S0. The Consent Decree constitutes a complete resolution of all claims that were made by the EEOC against Defendant in this action. 3. The parties stipulate to the jurisdiction of the Court and waive a hearing and entry offindings of fact and conclusions of law.
2

CaCsaese2:20:50-Sc-vc-v0-0020520S0 DocDuomcuemnte1n8t 17F-2iled iFnileTdXS0D7/2o1n/20080/165/06PagPeag3eo3f 1o0f 8
4. By entering into this Consent Decree, the Defendant has not admitted any contentions regarding the allegations on the merits of this cause of action. Nothing contained in this Consent Decree shall be construed as an admission of liability on the part of the Defendant. By entering into this Consent Decree, the Court has not made any determination with respect to the claims made by the Plaintiff or defenses asserted by Defendant. This Consent Decree is entered with the consent of the parties and does not constitute an adjudication or finding by the Court on the merits of the allegations of the Complaint.
5. Defendant has represented that it has terminated the employment of Raul Reyna and shall not re-employ Raul Reyna in any capacity during the terms of the Consent Decree.
6. Contingent upon Charging Party signing a separate release of all claims against Defendant, and after Defendant has received such release, Defendant agrees to pay the total sum of $16,000.00 in full and final settlement of the Commission's lawsuit to provide monetary relief to Charging Party. This payment will be made within twentyone (21) days from the entry of this Consent Decree or Charging Party's execution and delivery to Defendant of a standard release of claims, whichever is later. The Commission shall notify Defendant within seven (7) days of entry of the Consent Decree of the address to which the check to Charging Party will be mailed. A copy of the check disbursed shall be mailed to the Commission's undersigned counsel of record on the same day the check is mailed to the Charging Party.
3

CaCsaese2:20:50-Sc-vc-v0-0020520S0DocDuomcuemnte1n8t 17F-2iled iFnileTdXS0D7/2o1n/20080/165/06PagPeag4eo4f 1o0f 8
7. Defendant agrees to segregate all documents related to Charging Party's
charge of discrimination and the Commission's lawsuit from Charging Party's personnel
file. In response to any request for reference or other inquiry by any potential employer
concerning Charging Party, Defendant shall provide only Charging Party's employment
dates, confirm his salary range, and either confirm his job title or provide a description of
his job duties with Defendant. Defendant shall not reference his charge of
discrimination, the EEOC's lawsuit or this Consent Decree.
8. Harassment Policy and Complaint Procedures. Within ninety (90) days
from the entry of this Decree, Defendant shall adopt a race harassment policy and
complaint procedure that meets the following criteria:
(a) prohibits discrimination against any employee on the basis of race in violation of Title VII and prohibits any act, policy or practice that has the effect of harassing or intimidating any employee on the basis of race in violation of Title VII;
(b) 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 race in violation of Title VII; defines and provides examples of race harassment;
(c) provides for prompt investigation of race harassment complaints and for prompt action, which is appropriate and effective, to remedy the discrimination; imposes a duty on all Defendant's officers, managers, and supervisory personnel to actively monitor all work areas to ensure compliance with Defendant's race harassment policy;
(d) encourages all Defendant employees to report any incident and/or complaint of race harassment of which they become aware, regardless of the position held by the harasser, to the person(s) responsible for handling such complaints; and provides assurances
4

CaCsaese2:20:50-Sc-vc-v0-0020520S0DocDuomcuemnte1n8t 17F-2iled iFnilTedXS0D7/2o1n/20080/165/06PaPgeagSeo5f 1o0f 8
that complainants shall not be subjected to intimidation, harassment and/or retaliation; (t) provides that upon the conclusion of Defendant's investigation, the results of the investigation and the remedial actions taken or proposed will be promptly communicated in writing to the complaining party; (g) provides for substantial and progressive discipline for violating Defendant's race harassment policy up to and including discharge; (h) requires that all employees report incidents of possible race harassment to the person(s) identified by Defendant the person(s) charged with the responsibility for investigating discrimination complaints; and (i) provides that Defendant's race harassment policy and complaint procedures be drafted in plain and simple English and Spanish.
9. Defendant shall provide, using an attorney from Feldman & Rogers, L.L.P., a training program to last not less than two (2) hours on employment discrimination, including the law relating to race discrimination, racial harassment and retaliation to all management employees of Defendant. All participants shall be required to sign a registry upon completion ofthe training. The training shall be conducted within six (6) months of the entry ofthis Decree.
10. Defendant shall notify the Commission about each training session prior to its commencement. The notice shall indicate the time, place and date of the training. The agenda, the teaching materials and the name of the trainer shall be submitted to the EEOC for approval prior to the training. EEOC shall then have fourteen (14) business days from the date of the receipt of the information to accept or reject the contents of the topic outline. In the event that the EEOC does not approve Defendant's materials,
5

CCasaese2:20:50-5c-vc-v0-002052050 DocDuomcuemnte1n8t 17F-2iled iFnileTdXS07D/2o1n/20080/165/06PagPeag6eo6f 1o0f 8
Defendant shall have ten (10) busines days to submit a revised outline and in such an event the Defendant's six (6) month de dline for conducting the training will commence from the date of approval by the EEOC.
11. Following the training, D fendant shall notify the EEOC of the training by indicating when and where the trainin took place, the duration of the training, and the identity of the trainers and the attendee . A copy of the registry shall be submitted to the EEOC as part of Defendant's reporti g obligations. Reports of the training shall be submitted to the EEOC no more than fourteen (14) days following the training. The notification or report shall be submitte to the EEOC at the following address: Rudy L. Sustaita, EEOC Houston District Office 7th Floor, Houston, Texas 77002.
12. Within fourteen (14) busi ess days after the entry of this Decree, Defendant shall post copies of the Notice attache as Exhibit "A" to this Consent Decree at all its Houston facilities in conspicuous locati ns easily accessible to and commonly frequented by employees. The Notice shall remai posted for the duration of this Consent Decree. Defendant shall ensure that the posting are not altered, defaced or covered by any other material. Defendant shall certify to th EEOC in writing within fourteen (14) business days after entry of the Decree that the N tices have been properly posted.
13. The EEOC and Defendant shall bear their own costs and attorney's fees. 14. This Consent Decree shall remain in effect for one year from its entry.
6

CCasaese2:20:50-Sc-vc-v0-0020520S0DocDuomcuemnte1n8t 17F-2iled iFnileTdXS0D7/2o1n/20080/165/06PagPeag7eo7f 1o0f 8

Signed on this ~ day of -----"<-=--=-----+-c~

Texas. So ORDERED AND ENTERED this

/

/

day of-f7L-_ _-IF-_ _ _, 2006

at Corpus Christi, Texas.

7

CaCsaese2:20:50-Scv-c-v0-0020520S0DocDuomceunmte1n8t 17F-i2led iFnilTeXdS0D7/2o1n/20080/165/06PaPgeag8eo8f o1f08

AGREED:
MPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY COMMISSION
1/ w'i"rfI-+- ~o-~~
Equal Employment Opportunity Commission Houston District Office 1919 Smith Street, 7th Floor Houston, Texas 77002 Telephone: 713/209-3400 Facsimile: 713/209-3402 rudy.sustaita@eeoc.gov

COUNSEL FOR DEFENDANT

~it#IAlt~/ , ~)%~/"L~ RIHARDA MORRrS
State Bar No. 14497750

~

HOLLY M. ROBERTS

State Bar No. 24037369

FELDMAN & ROGERS, L.L.P.

5718 Westheimer, Suite 1200

Houston, Texas 77057

Telephone: (713) 960-6000

Facsimile: (713) 960-6025

nnorris@feldmanrogers.com

8

 
 Case: 2:05-cv-00250 As of: 04/24/2012 12:18 PM CDT 1 of 3
CLOSED, MAG
U.S. District Court SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS (Corpus Christi)
CIVIL DOCKET FOR CASE #: 2:05−cv−00250

Equal Employment Opportunity Commission v. Phoenix Industrial Service, Inc. et al Assigned to: Judge Hayden Head Referred to: Magistrate Judge B. Janice Ellington Cause: 28:1983 Civil Rights
Plaintiff

Date Filed: 05/18/2005 Date Terminated: 08/15/2006 Jury Demand: Plaintiff Nature of Suit: 442 Civil Rights: Jobs Jurisdiction: U.S. Government Plaintiff

Equal Employment Opportunity Commission

represented by Rodolfo Lucio Sustaita EEOC Senior Trial Attorney 1919 Smith St 7th Fl Houston, TX 77002 713−209−3400 Fax: 713−209−3402 Email: rudy.sustaita@eeoc.gov LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

V. Defendant Phoenix Industrial Service, Inc.
Defendant Phoenix Services

represented by Richard A Morris Rogers, Morris &Grover, L.L.P. 5718 Westheimer Ste 1200 Houston, TX 77057 713−960−6019 Fax: 713−960−6025 Email: rmorris@rmgllp.com ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
represented by Richard A Morris (See above for address) ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

Date Filed 05/18/2005 05/18/2005 05/19/2005
05/31/2005
06/02/2005

# Docket Text
1 COMPLAINT against Phoenix Industrial Service, Inc., Phoenix Services filed by Equal Employment Opportunity Commission.(dterrell, ) (Entered: 05/19/2005)
Fee waived re: 1 Complaint , filed. (dterrell, ) (Entered: 05/19/2005)
2 ORDER for Initial Pretrial and Scheduling Conference and Order to Disclose Interested Persons. Initial Conference set for 11/17/2005 at 01:15 PM before Chief Judge Hayden Head.(vrios, ) (Entered: 05/19/2005)
3 ORDER REFERRING CASE to Magistrate Judge B. Janice Ellington, who shall manage and prepare this case for trial before the undersigned.( Signed by Judge Hayden Head ) Parties notified.(drodriguez, ) (Entered: 06/01/2005)
4 AMENDED NOTICE of Hearing. Parties notified. Scheduling Conference set for 11/17/2005 at 01:15 PM before Magistrate Judge B. Janice Ellington, filed. (drodriguez, ) (Entered: 06/02/2005)

Case: 2:05-cv-00250 As of: 04/24/2012 12:18 PM CDT 2 of 3

06/06/2005 06/06/2005 06/29/2005 07/01/2005 07/01/2005 11/07/2005 11/17/2005 11/17/2005
11/17/2005
05/16/2006 05/19/2006 05/24/2006
05/25/2006
06/12/2006 07/21/2006

5 Summons Issued as to Phoenix Industrial Service, Inc. , filed.(lcayce, ) (Entered: 06/06/2005)
6 DISCLOSURE OF INTERESTED PARTIES by Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, filed.(lcayce, ) (Entered: 06/06/2005)
7 RETURN of Service Executed as to Phoenix Industrial Service, Inc. and Phoenix Services on 6/23/05 re: Summons and Complaint, filed.(mewilliams, ) (Entered: 06/29/2005)
8 ANSWER to Complaint by Phoenix Industrial Service, Inc., Phoenix Services, filed.(Morris, Richard) (Entered: 07/01/2005)
9 CERTIFICATE OF INTERESTED PARTIES by Phoenix Industrial Service, Inc., Phoenix Services, filed.(Morris, Richard) (Entered: 07/01/2005)
10 JOINT DISCOVERY/CASE MANAGEMENT PLAN by Phoenix Industrial Service, Inc., Phoenix Services, filed.(Morris, Richard) (Entered: 11/07/2005)
11 INITIAL DISCLOSURES by Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, filed.(lcayce, ) (Entered: 11/17/2005)
Minute Entry for proceedings held before Judge B. Janice Ellington. Initial PRETRIAL CONFERENCE held on 11/17/2005. Case Called. Appearances made. Brief history/status of case presented. Counsel requested additional time for discovery. Deadlines and trial dates discussed. Trial date tentatively set for August 2006. Scheduling order to be submitted. Hearing Concluded. Appearances: Richard A Morris, Rodolfo Lucio Sustaita.(Digital # 1:20:55−1:33:09)(ERO:Lisa Hardwick), filed.(lhardwick, ) (Entered: 11/17/2005)
12 SCHEDULING ORDER: Amended Pleadings due by 5/15/2006 Joinder of Parties due by 12/15/2005 Pltf Expert Witness List due by 4/10/2006 Deft Expert Witness List due by 4/10/2006 Discovery due by 6/12/2006 Dispositive Motion Filing due by 6/12/2006 Joint Pretrial Order due by 8/28/2006 Pretrial Conference set for 9/7/2006 at 01:15 PM before Chief Judge Hayden Head Jury Selection set for 9/12/2006 at 09:00AM before Chief Judge Hayden Head Jury Trial set for 9/12/2006 at 09:00 AM before Chief Judge Hayden Head.( Signed by Judge B. Janice Ellington ) Parties notified.(mserpa, ) (Entered: 11/21/2005)
13 Joint MOTION to Continue Discovery and Dispositive Motion Deadline by Phoenix Services, filed. Motion Docket Date 6/5/2006. (Attachments: # 1 Proposed Order)(Morris, Richard) (Entered: 05/16/2006)
14 NOTICE of Hearing re: 13 Joint MOTION to Continue Discovery and Dispositive Motion Deadline. Parties notified Motion Hearing set for 5/24/2006 at 01:00 PM before Magistrate Judge B. Janice Ellington, filed. (dperez, ) (Entered: 05/23/2006)
Minute Entry for proceedings held before Judge B. Janice Ellington. TELEPHONE CONFERENCE held on 5/24/2006 granting 13 Joint MOTION to Continue Discovery and Dispositive Motion Deadline. Case Called. Motion briefly discussed. Trial date and deadlines moved forward 60 days. Amended scheduling order to be entered. Appearances:Holly Roberts, Rodolfo Lucio Sustaita.(Digital # 12:59:44−1:04:32)(ERO:Genay Rogan), filed.(lhardwick, ) (Entered: 05/24/2006)
15 AMENDED SCHEDULING ORDER: Amended Pleadings due by 7/14/2006 Pltf Expert Witness List due by 6/9/2006 Deft Expert Witness List due by 6/9/2006 Discovery due by 8/11/2006 Dispositive Motion Filing due by 8/11/2006 Joint Pretrial Order due by 10/27/2006 Pretrial Conference set for 11/9/2006 at 01:15 PM before Chief Judge Hayden Head Jury Selection set for 11/14/2006 at 08:30AM before Chief Judge Hayden Head Jury Trial set for 11/14/2006 at 08:30 AM before Chief Judge Hayden Head.( Signed by Judge B. Janice Ellington ) Parties notified.(lcayce, ) (Entered: 05/25/2006)
16 RULE 29 AGREEMENT re: Extension of Time to Respond to Discovery by Phoenix Services, filed.(Roberts, Holly) (Entered: 06/12/2006)
17 Agreed Motion to Enter Consent Decree by Phoenix Industrial Service, Inc., filed. (Attachments: # 1)(Morris, Richard) (Entered: 07/21/2006)

Case: 2:05-cv-00250 As of: 04/24/2012 12:18 PM CDT 3 of 3

08/15/2006

18 CONSENT DECREE / ORDER .( Signed by Judge Hayden Head ) Parties notified.(lcayce, ) (Entered: 08/15/2006)