A. LUIS LUCERO, JR., REGIONAL ATTORNEY KATHRYN OLSON, SUPERVISORY TRIAL ATTORNEY 12 TERI HEALY, TRIAL ATTORNEY EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY COMMISSION 3 909 FIRST AVENUE, SUITE 400 SEATTLE, WA 98104 4 Telephone: (206) 220-6916 Faxcimile: (206) 220-6911 5 E-mail: thealy@eeoc.gov

6 Attorneys for Plaintiff

7

8

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

9

AT SAN JOSE

10 EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY
11 COMMISSION,

12

Plaintiff,

13

v.

14 MEMSCAP, Inc.

15

Defendant.

16

)

)

)

CIVIL ACTION NO.

)

)

COMPLAINT

)

)

JURY TRIAL DEMAND

)

)

)

)

17

NATURE OF THE ACTION

18

This is an action under the Age Discrimination in Employment Act (“ADEA”) to correct

19 unlawful employment practices on the basis of age and to provide appropriate relief to Robert Miller

20 and Michael Tavares, two individuals adversely affected by such practices. The Equal Employment

21 Opportunity Commission alleges that MEMSCAP, Inc. (“MEMSCAP” or the “Employer”)

22 unlawfully discriminated against Robert Miller and Michael Tavares, in that MEMSCAP terminated

23 each individual based on age.

24

JURISDICTION AND VENUE

25

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

26 1337, 1343 and 1345. This action is authorized and instituted pursuant to Section 7 (b) of the Age

27 Discrimination in Employment Act of 1967, as amended, 29 U.S.C. §626 (b) (“ADEA”), which

COMPLAINT - PAGE 1

E Q U A L E M P L O YM E N T O PP O R T UN IT Y C O M M I SS IO N Seattle District Office Federal Office Building
909 First Avenue, Suite 400 Seattle, Washington 98104-1061
Telephone (206) 220-6883 Fax (206) 220-6911 TDD (206) 220-6882

incorporates by reference Sections 16 (c) and 17 of the Fair Labor Standards Act of 1938, as

12 amended, 29 U.S.C. §§216 (c) and 217.

3

2. The employment practices alleged to be unlawful were committed within the

4 jurisdiction of the United States District Court for the Northern District of California at San Jose.

5

PARTIES

6

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

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

8 enforcement of the ADEA and is expressly authorized to bring this action by Section 7 (b) of the

9 ADEA, 29 U.S.C. §626 (b), as amended by Section 2 of Reorganizing Plan No. 1 of 1978, 92 Stat.

10 3781, and by Public Law 98-532 (1984), 98 Stat. 2705.

11

4. At all relevant times, Defendant, MEMSCAP, has continuously been doing business

12 in the State of California and the City of San Jose, and has continuously had at least 15 employees.

13 Defendant’s North American headquarters is in San Jose, California.

14

5. At all relevant times, defendant Employer has been continuously engaged in an

15 industry affecting commere within the meaning of Section 11 (b), (g), and (h) of the ADEA, 29

16 U.S.C. §§630 (b), (g), and (h).

17

CONCILIATION

18

6. Prior to institution of this lawsuit, the Commission’s representatives attempted to

19 eliminate the unlawful employment practices alleged below and to effect voluntary compliance with

20 the ADEA through informal methods of conciliation, conference, and persuasion within the meaning

21 of Section 7(b) of the ADEA, 29 U.S.C. §626(b).

22

STATEMENT OF CLAIMS

23

8. More than thirty days prior to the institution of this lawsuit, Robert Miller and

24 Michael Tavares each filed a charge with the Commission alleging violations of Section7(b) of the

25 ADEA by defendant Employer. All conditions precedent to the institution of this lawsuit have been

26 fulfilled.

27

COMPLAINT - PAGE 2

E Q U A L E M P L O YM E N T O PP O R T UN IT Y C O M M I SS IO N Seattle District Office Federal Office Building
909 First Avenue, Suite 400 Seattle, Washington 98104-1061
Telephone (206) 220-6883 Fax (206) 220-6911 TDD (206) 220-6882

9. Since at least April 15, 2002, defendant Employer has engaged in unlawful

12 employment practices at its San Jose, California facilities, in violation of Section 623 (a) of the

3 ADEA, 29 U.S.C. §§ 623 (a). The defendant Employer discharged each individual from

4 employment with the company based on the individual’s age.

5

10. The effect of the practices complained of in paragraph 8 above has been to deprive

6 Robert Miller and Michael Tavares of equal employment opportunities and otherwise adversely

7 affect each individual’s status as an employee because of his age.

8

11. The unlawful employment practices complained of in paragraph 9 above were and are

9 willful within the meaning of Section 7 (b) of the ADEA, 29 U.S.C. § 626 (b).

10

11

PRAYER FOR RELIEF

12

Wherefore, the Commission respectfully requests that this Court:

13

A. Grant a permanent injunction enjoining defendant Employer, its officers, agents,

14 successors, assigns, and all persons in active concert or participation with it, from engaging in any

15 employment practice that discriminates on the basis of age against individuals 40 years of age and

16 older.

17

B. Order defendant Employer to institute and carry out policies, practices, and programs

18 that provide equal employment opportunities for qualified individuals 40 years of age and older, and

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

20

C. Grant a judgment requiring defendant to pay appropriate back wages in an amount to

21 be determined at trial, an equal sum as liquidated damages, prejudgment interest and front pay to

22 Robert Miller and Michael Tavares.

23

D. Order defendant to make whole Robert Miller and Michael Travares, the individuals

24 adversely affected by the unlawful practices described above, by providing the affirmative relief

25 necessary to eradicate the effects of its unlawful practices, including but not limited to reinstatement

26

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

27 interest.

COMPLAINT - PAGE 3

E Q U A L E M P L O YM E N T O PP O R T UN IT Y C O M M I SS IO N Seattle District Office Federal Office Building
909 First Avenue, Suite 400 Seattle, Washington 98104-1061
Telephone (206) 220-6883 Fax (206) 220-6911 TDD (206) 220-6882

E. Award the Commission its costs in this action.

12

3

JURY TRIAL DEMAND

4

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

5

6

DATED this

day of

, 2003.

7

8 A. LUIS LUCERO, JR. Regional Attorney
9 KATHRYN OLSON
10 Supervisory Trial Attorney

ERIC S. DREIBAND General Counsel
JAMES D. LEE Deputy General Counsel

11 TERI L. HEALY Trial Attorney
12 BY:
13 EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY
14 COMMISSION Seattle District Office
15 909 First Avenue, Suite 400 Seattle, Washington 98104
16 Telephone (206) 220-6916

GWENDOLYN YOUNG REAMS Associate General Counsel
Office of the General Counsel 1801 “L” Street NW Washington, D.C. 20507

17

Attorneys for Plaintiff

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

COMPLAINT - PAGE 4

E Q U A L E M P L O YM E N T O PP O R T UN IT Y C O M M I SS IO N Seattle District Office Federal Office Building
909 First Avenue, Suite 400 Seattle, Washington 98104-1061
Telephone (206) 220-6883 Fax (206) 220-6911 TDD (206) 220-6882

 
 Case 5:03-cv-04323-JF Document 17 Filed 03/18/2004 Page 1 of 7

1 TERI L. HEALY, TRIAL ATTORNEY KATHRYN OLSON, SUPERVISORY TRIAL ATTORNEY
2 A. LUIS LUCERO, JR., REGIONAL ATTORNEY 909 FIRST AVENUE, SUITE 400
3 SEATTLE, WA 98104 Telephone: 206.220.6916
4 Facsimile: 206.220.6911 teri.healy@eeoc.gov
5
Attorneys for Plaintiff 6 U.S. EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY COMMISSION

7 CHRISTOPHER E. COBEY, SBC No. 060821 LITTLER MENDELSON
8 50 West San Fernando Street, 14th Floor San Jose, CA 95113
9 Telephone: 408.998.4150 Facsimile: 408.288.5686
10 ccobey@littler.com

11 Attorneys for Defendant MEMSCAP, INC.

12

13

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA (SAN JOSE DIVISION)

14

15 EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY )

COMMISSION,

)

16

)

Plaintiff, )

17

)

v.

)

18

)

MEMSCAP, Inc.

)

19

)

Defendant. )

20

)

CIVIL ACTION NO. C 03 01174 JF
CONSENT DECREE AND ORDER

21

I. INTRODUCTION

22

1. This action originated with charges of discrimination filed by Michael Tavares on

23 June 16, 2002 and Robert Miller on June 18, 2002, with the Plaintiff Equal Employment Opportunity

24 Commission ("EEOC" or "Commission") against Defendant Memscap, Inc. (“Memscap”).

25

2. The Commission filed this lawsuit on September 24, 2003 in the United States

26 27 28 CONSENT DECREE PAGE 1

U.S. EQ U A L EM P L O Y M E N T OP P O R TU N I T Y CO M M I S S IO N
Seattle District Office Federal Office Building 909 First Avenue, Suite 400 Seattle, WA 98104-1061 Telephone 206.220.6883
Fax 206.220.6911 TDD 206.220.6882

Case 5:03-cv-04323-JF Document 17 Filed 03/18/2004 Page 2 of 7

1 District Court for the Northern District of California, San Jose Division against Memscap alleging

2 Memscap unlawfully discriminated against Michael Tavares and Robert Miller, in that it terminated

3 each individual based on age in violation of the Age Discrimination in Employment Act of 1967,

4 29 U.S.C. § 601 et seq.

5

II. NON-ADMISSION OF LIABILITY AND

6

NON-DETERMINATION BY THE COURT

7

4. This Consent Decree is not an admission of wrongdoing or an adjudication or finding

8 on the merits of the case.

9

5. The EEOC and Memscap, Inc. want to conclude all claims arising out of the above

10 charges without expending further resources in contested litigation.

11

III. SETTLEMENT SCOPE

12

6. This Consent Decree is the final and completeresolution of all allegations of unlawful

13 employment practices contained in: (1) the charges filed by the Tavares and Miller with the EEOC;

14 (2) the EEOC's administrative determinations concerning the Tavares, Miller and Memscap; and (3)

15 the Complaint filed herein by the EEOC on behalf of Tavares and Miller; including all claims by the

16 parties for attorney fees and costs.

17

IV. MONETARY RELIEF

18

7. In settlement of the EEOC’s claims in this lawsuit Memscap has agreed to pay Robert

19 Miller and Michael Tavares each $40,000 by March 31, 2004 and $22,500 by August 15, 2004.

20

V. INJUNCTIVE RELIEF

21

A. General Provisions

22

8. Memscap agrees to comply with the provisions of the ADEA in its employment

23 decisions. To further this commitment, they will monitor the affirmative obligations of this Consent

24 Decree.

25

9. Memscap will not retaliate against any applicant or current or former employee for

26 27 28 CONSENT DECREE PAGE 2

U.S. EQ U A L EM P L O Y M E N T OP P O R TU N I T Y CO M M I S S IO N
Seattle District Office Federal Office Building 909 First Avenue, Suite 400 Seattle, WA 98104-1061 Telephone 206.220.6883
Fax 206.220.6911 TDD 206.220.6882

Case 5:03-cv-04323-JF Document 17 Filed 03/18/2004 Page 3 of 7

1 opposing any practice made unlawful by the ADEA or for making a charge, testifying, assisting, or

2 participating in any investigation, proceeding, or hearing associated with this action.

3

10. Memscap will not disclose any information or make references to any charges of

4 discrimination or this lawsuit in responding to employment reference requests for information about

5 Tavares and Miller.

6

B. Establishment of Policy and Procedures to Prevent Discrimination

7

11. In recognition of its obligations under the ADEA, Memscap will institute the policies

8 and practices set forth below.

9

12. With the assistance of an independent discrimination consultant, Memscap will adopt

10 a new written equal employment opportunity policy which sets forth requirements of federal laws

11 against employment discrimination and specifically those provisions which make it unlawful to

12 discriminate against any current or former employee based on age.

13

C. Posting Notice

14

13. Within six (6) months after the entry of this decree, Memscap shall present each

15 employee with a hard copy or electronic copy of the new written equal employment opportunity

16 policy described in Paragraph 12 along with the Notice to Employees (attached hereto as Exhibit A).

17

14. Withing two (2) weeks after the entry of this decree, Memscap shall post the Notice

18 to Employees (Exhibit A) in prominent and conspicuous locations in or near the employee lunch

19 room or other place within the Memscap premises where employees tend to gather. The notice shall

20 remain posted for the duration of this Decree. Memscap shall maintain a copy of this Decree in its

21 Personnel Office for any employee who wishes to review it.

22

23

24

25

26 27 28 CONSENT DECREE PAGE 3

U.S. EQ U A L EM P L O Y M E N T OP P O R TU N I T Y CO M M I S S IO N
Seattle District Office Federal Office Building 909 First Avenue, Suite 400 Seattle, WA 98104-1061 Telephone 206.220.6883
Fax 206.220.6911 TDD 206.220.6882

Case 5:03-cv-04323-JF Document 17 Filed 03/18/2004 Page 4 of 7

1

D. Training

2

14. During the term of this Consent Decree, Memscap shall ensure at least two hours of

3 the EEO training is provided annually to all Human Resources staff and managers. During the term

4 of this Consent Decree Memscap shall provide at least one hour of annual EEO training to all non-

5 management employees. The EEO training shall include a review of Memscap’s anti-discrimination

6 policies including a discussion of age discrimination, and Memscap’s requirements regarding the

7 prompt and thorough investigation of all complaints of unlawful harassment and discrimination

8 which can be provided with an online training program.

9

15. The first training described in paragraph 14 shall take place within sixty (60) days of

10 entry of this Consent Decree. The form and content of the training events will be subject to prior

11 review by the EEOC, and the cost of training shall be borne by Memscap.

12

16. Within thirty (30) days after each training session described in Paragraph 14,

13 Memscap will provide to the EEOC a list of attendees of each training session, an evaluation form

14 filled out by each attendee with the option to sign their names or remain anonymous, and a copy of

15 the training materials and handouts used in each such training session.

16

E. Reporting

17

17. Six months after entry of this decree, and every six months thereafter for the term of

18 the decree, Memscap will provide a report to the Commission with the following information:

19

a. a summary of complaints of discrimination, harassment, or retaliation, if any,

20 and any resulting internal investigations conducted pursuant to Memscap’s anti-discrimination

21 policies during the preceding six-month period. The report will describe the resolution of each

22 complaint.

23

b. a statement listing the other provisions of this decree that Memscap is required

24 to perform during the preceding period and certifying that it has complied with the terms of the

25 decree. If Memscap has not complied with any term of the decree, the statement will specify the

26 27 28 CONSENT DECREE PAGE 4

U.S. EQ U A L EM P L O Y M E N T OP P O R TU N I T Y CO M M I S S IO N
Seattle District Office Federal Office Building 909 First Avenue, Suite 400 Seattle, WA 98104-1061 Telephone 206.220.6883
Fax 206.220.6911 TDD 206.220.6882

Case 5:03-cv-04323-JF Document 17 Filed 03/18/2004 Page 5 of 7

1 areas of noncompliance, the reason for the noncompliance, and the steps taken to bring Memscap

2 into compliance.

3

VI. ENFORCEMENT

4

18. The United States District Court for Northern District of California shall retain

5 jurisdiction over this matter for the duration of the decree. If the EEOC concludes that Memscap

6 has breached any of the above provisions, it may bring an action to enforce this Consent Decree no

7 sooner than fourteen (14) days after providing Memscap written notification of the alleged breach.

8 The period following the written notice will be used by the parties for good faith efforts to reach

9 agreement on how to bring Memscap into compliance with the decree.

10

VII. TERMINATION OF DECREE

11

19. This decree shall be in effect for three (3) years commencing with the date the decree

12 is entered by the court. If the EEOC petitions the court and the court finds Memscap to have

13 violated the terms of this Consent Decree, it may extend the period of this Consent Decree and award

14 the Commission its costs in bringing an enforcement action.

15 //

16 //

17 //

18 //

19 //

20 //

21 //

22 //

23 //

24 //

25 //

26 27 28 CONSENT DECREE PAGE 5

U.S. EQ U A L EM P L O Y M E N T OP P O R TU N I T Y CO M M I S S IO N
Seattle District Office Federal Office Building 909 First Avenue, Suite 400 Seattle, WA 98104-1061 Telephone 206.220.6883
Fax 206.220.6911 TDD 206.220.6882

Case 5:03-cv-04323-JF Document 17 Filed 03/18/2004 Page 6 of 7

1

VIII. CONCLUSION

2

20. The provisions of this Consent Decree are not binding on the parties until

3 the authorized representatives of each party sign and the court enters the consent

4 decree in the court.

5

6

DATED this 12th day of

March

, 2004.

7

8 A. LUIS LUCERO, JR. Regional Attorney
9
KATHRYN OLSON 10 Supervisory Trial Attorney

ERIC S. DREIBAND General Counsel
JAMES D. LEE Deputy General Counsel

11 TERI HEALY Trial Attorney
12

GWENDOLYN YOUNG REAMS Associate General Counsel

13

BY: ______s/ Teri L. Healy_____________

14

EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY

15 COMMISSION

Seattle District Office

16 909 First Avenue, Suite 400

Office of the General Counsel

Seattle, Washington 98104

1801 "L" Street, N.W.

17 Telephone 206.220.6916

Washington, D.C. 20507

teri.healy@eeoc.gov

18

Attorneys for Plaintiff

19

20 BY: ________s/ Christopher E. Cobey______

21 CHRISTOPHER E. COBEY, SBC No. 060821 LITTLER MENDELSON
22 50 West San Fernando Street, 14th Floor San Jose, CA 95113
23 Telephone: 408.998.4150
Facsimile: 408.288.5686 24 ccobey@littler.com

25

Attorneys for Defendant MEMSCAP, INC.

26 27 28 CONSENT DECREE PAGE 6

U.S. EQ U A L EM P L O Y M E N T OP P O R TU N I T Y CO M M I S S IO N
Seattle District Office Federal Office Building 909 First Avenue, Suite 400 Seattle, WA 98104-1061 Telephone 206.220.6883
Fax 206.220.6911 TDD 206.220.6882

Case 5:03-cv-04323-JF Document 17 Filed 03/18/2004 Page 7 of 7

1

ORDER

2

The Court, having considered the foregoing stipulated agreement of the parties, HEREBY

3 ORDERS THAT the foregoing Consent Decree be, and the same hereby is, approved as the final

4 decree of this Court in full settlement of this action. This lawsuit is hereby dismissed with

5 prejudice and without costs or attorneys' fees to any party. The Court retains jurisdiction of this

6 matter for purposes of enforcing the Consent Decree approved herein.

7

8

DATED this 18TH day of March

, 2004.

9

/s/electronic signature authorized 10

The Honorable Jeremy Fogel

11

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26 27 28 CONSENT DECREE PAGE 7

U.S. EQ U A L EM P L O Y M E N T OP P O R TU N I T Y CO M M I S S IO N
Seattle District Office Federal Office Building 909 First Avenue, Suite 400 Seattle, WA 98104-1061 Telephone 206.220.6883
Fax 206.220.6911 TDD 206.220.6882

 
 CAND-ECF - Docket Report

https://ecf.cand.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/DktRpt.pl?844622611260599-L_9...
ADRMOP, CLOSED, E-Filing, MEDTERM, PRVADR
U.S. District Court California Northern District (San Jose) CIVIL DOCKET FOR CASE #: 5:03-cv-04323-JF

Equal Employment Opportunity Commission v. MEMSCAP, Inc Date Filed: 09/24/2003

Assigned to: Hon. Jeremy Fogel

Jury Demand: Plaintiff

Referred to: Magistrate Judge Patricia V. Trumbull

Nature of Suit: 442 Civil Rights: Jobs

Cause: 28:451 Employment Discrimination

Jurisdiction: U.S. Government Plaintiff

Plaintiff
Equal Employment Opportunity Commission

represented by A. Lewis Lucero Equal Employment Opportunity Commission 909 First Avenue Suite 400 Seattle, WA 98104 206-220-6916 Fax: 206-220-6911 LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

Kathryn Olson Equal Employment Opportunity Commission 909 Frist Avenue Suite 400 Seattle, WA 98104 206-220-6916 Fax: 206-220-6911 LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

Teri L. Healy Equal Employment Opportunity Commission 909 First Avenue Suite 400 Seattle, WA 98104 206-220-6916 Fax: 206-220-6911 Email: thealy@eeoc.gov LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

V.

1 of 4

5/29/2007 9:42 AM

CAND-ECF - Docket Report

https://ecf.cand.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/DktRpt.pl?844622611260599-L_9...

Defendant MEMSCAP, Inc

represented by Alexander Nestor Morgan, Lewis & Bockius LLP 2 Palo Alto Square 3000 El Camino Real, Suite 700 Palo Alto, CA 94306 650-843-4000 Fax: 650-843-4001 Email: anestor@morganlewis.com ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
Christopher E. Cobey Littler Mendelson 50 W. San Fernando Street, 14th Floor San Jose, CA 95113 408/998-4150 Email: ccobey@littler.com ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

Date Filed 09/24/2003
09/24/2003 09/24/2003 09/24/2003 09/25/2003
10/02/2003 11/26/2003 11/26/2003

#

Docket Text

1 COMPLAINT (summons issued); jury demand: against MEMSCAP, Inc (Filing fee $150 receipt number 5508521). Filed by Equal Employment Opportunity Commission. (bw, COURT STAFF) Additional attachment(s) added on 10/8/2003 (bw, COURT STAFF). (Entered: 09/24/2003)
2 ADR SCHEDULING ORDER: Case Management Statement due by 1/20/2004. Case Management Conference set for 1/27/2004 at 02:00 PM. (Attachments: # 1 Standing Order)(bw, COURT STAFF) (Entered: 09/24/2003)
CASE DESIGNATED for Electronic Filing. (bw, COURT STAFF) (Entered: 09/24/2003)
Summons Issued as to MEMSCAP, Inc (bw, COURT STAFF) (Entered: 09/24/2003)
3 CLERK'S NOTICE: Refund of filing fee to Equal Employment Opportunity Commissioner due to error in payment of filing fee. (bw, COURT STAFF) Additional attachment(s) added on 9/25/2003 (bw, COURT STAFF). (Entered: 09/25/2003)
4 CLERK'S NOTICE re: Failure to E-File Complaint by Counsel for Plaintiff and/or Failure to Register as an E-Filer (bw, COURT STAFF) (Entered: 10/02/2003)
5 DEFENDANT MEMSCAP, INC. ANSWER to Complaint by MEMSCAP, Inc. (Nestor, Alexander) (Filed on 11/26/2003) (Entered: 11/26/2003)
6 Declination to Proceed Before a U.S. Magistrate Judge by MEMSCAP, Inc AND REQUEST FOR REASSIGNMENT TO A UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE. (Nestor, Alexander) (Filed on 11/26/2003) (Entered: 11/26/2003)

2 of 4

5/29/2007 9:42 AM

CAND-ECF - Docket Report
12/01/2003 12/02/2003
01/13/2004 01/16/2004 01/22/2004 01/27/2004
02/03/2004 02/10/2004 02/24/2004 03/15/2004 03/18/2004

https://ecf.cand.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/DktRpt.pl?844622611260599-L_9...
7 CLERK'S NOTICE of impending reassignment. Case Management Conference set for 1/26/2004 10:30 AM before Honorable Jeremy Fogel. (cm, ) (Filed on 12/1/2003) (Entered: 12/01/2003)
8 ORDER REASSIGNING CASE. Case reassigned to Judge Jeremy Fogel for all further proceedings. Judge Patricia V Trumbull remains as the referral judge. Signed by Executive Committee on December 2, 2003. (bw, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 12/2/2003) (Entered: 12/02/2003)
9 STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER SELECTING ADR PROCESS; ADR CERTIFICATION by MEMSCAP, Inc. (Cobey, Christopher) (Filed on 1/13/2004) (Entered: 01/13/2004)
10 JOINT CASE MANAGEMENT STATEMENT (L.R. 16-9(a)) filed by MEMSCAP, Inc. (Cobey, Christopher) (Filed on 1/16/2004) (Entered: 01/16/2004)
11 STIPULATION AND ORDER SELECTING ADR PROCESS. Signed by Judge Jeremy Fogel on 1/21/04. (jfsec, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 1/22/2004) (Entered: 01/22/2004)
12 Minute Entry: Initial Case Management Conference held on 1/26/2004 before Judge Jeremy Fogel (Date Filed: 1/27/2004). Parties stipulate to court mediation. Case set for jury trial on 11/29/04 at 1:30 p.m. and pretrial conference on 11/19/04 at 9:30 a.m. (Court Reporter Not reported.) (dlm, COURT STAFF) (Date Filed: 1/27/2004) (Entered: 01/27/2004)
13 ADR Clerk's Notice Appointing Carol Webster Millie as Mediator dated 2/3/2004. (af, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 2/3/2004) (Entered: 02/03/2004)
14 STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER RE: PRIVATE MEDIATION by MEMSCAP, Inc. (Cobey, Christopher) (Filed on 2/10/2004) (Entered: 02/10/2004)
15 STIPULATION AND ORDER RE PRIVATE MEDIATION. Signed by Judge Jeremy Fogel on 2/23/04. (jfsec, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 2/24/2004) (Entered: 02/24/2004)
16 STIPULATION Consent Decree and Proposed Order by Equal Employment Opportunity Commission. (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit A- Notice to Employees)(Healy, Teri) (Filed on 3/15/2004) (Entered: 03/15/2004)
17 CONSENT DECREE AND ORDER re 16 Stipulation filed by Equal Employment Opportunity Commission. Signed by Judge Jeremy Fogel on 3/18/04. (jfsec, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 3/18/2004) (Entered: 03/18/2004)

3 of 4

PACER Login:

PACER Service Center
Transaction Receipt
05/29/2007 07:40:55

hs0328

Client Code: eeoc

5/29/2007 9:42 AM

CAND-ECF - Docket Report

Description:

Docket Report

Billable Pages: 2

https://ecf.cand.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/DktRpt.pl?844622611260599-L_9...

Search Criteria:
Cost:

5:03-cv-04323-JF 0.16

4 of 4

5/29/2007 9:42 AM

 
 EEOC LITIGATION SETTLEMENT REPORT - MARCH 2004

http://www.eeoc.gov/litigation/settlements/settlement03-04.html

EEOC v. Memscap, Inc. No. 03-4323 JF (N.D. Cal. Mar. 18, 2004)
The Seattle District Office brought this ADEA action, alleging that defendant, a French corporation that designs, manufactures and markets microscopic machines and structures and has a small North American subsidiary headquartered in San Jose, terminated two charging parties because of their ages. CP Michael Tavares (50) and CP Robert Miller (52) were hired for management positions in February and March 2002, respectively, after they had face-to-face interviews with the subsidiary's employees in the San Jose office and a phone interview with defendant's head of sales in North America and its President/CEO. Charging parties first met defendant's management during their training in Grenoble, France the week of March 15, 2002, and a month later they received identical e-mails informing them of their dismissals. The explanation offered by the North American head of sales was that the President/CEO thought charging parties were "too seasoned," and the head of sales agreed with one of the CPs that this meant too old. Further, charging parties were told that their jobs had been eliminated but evidence revealed that defendant sought to fill their jobs immediately after their dismissals.
The case was resolved by a three-year consent decree that requires defendant to pay a total of $125,000 to the charging parties. In addition, defendant agrees to adopt, with the assistance of an independent consultant, a new written EEO policy that specifically sets forth federal requirements prohibiting age discrimination, and to provide annual EEO training to all HR staff, managers, and employees with an emphasis on defendant's anti-discrimination policies and complaint procedures. Finally, every six months defendant will submit a report to the EEOC detailing all complaints of harassment, discrimination, or retaliation and their resolutions.

1 of 1

5/29/2007 9:46 AM