Case 5:01-cv-00090-BO Document 1 Filed 02/02/2001 Page 1 of 5

PILE

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT,

D FEB 2 !)n"

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF NORTH CAROLINA Uf.4I1ID ltV "11(///

WESTERN DIVISION

By DISrRIC?i/Vlft., Cit:.
~f:~fDX~ . '-cfR/(

EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY COMMISSION,
Plaintiff,
v.
WAL-MART STORES, INC.,
Defendant.

)

)

)

CMLACTION NO. 5:C1-~ -~D·ID

) )

(~)

)

COMPLAINT

)

JURY TRIAL DEMANDED

)

)

)

NATURE OF THE ACTION

This is an action under Title I of the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990 and Title I

of the Civil Rights Act of 1991 to correct unlawful employment practices on the basis of

disability and to provide appropriate relief to Craig P. Smith who was adversely affected by such

practices. The Commission alleges that Defendant, Wal-Mart Stores, Inc., discriminated against

Mr. Smith, a qualified applicant, by refusing to hire him for 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) ofthe

Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990 ("ADA"), 42 U.S.C. §12117(a), which incorporates by

reference Section 706(£)(1) and (3) ofTitle VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 ("Title VII"), 42

U.S.C. §2000(e)-5(£)(l) and (3), and pursuant to Section 102 of the Civil Rights Act of 1991,42

U.S.C. §1981.

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

Case 5:01-cv-00090-BO Document 1 Filed 02/02/2001 Page 2 of 5
jurisdiction of United States District Court for the Eastern District of North Carolina. PARTIES
3. Plaintiff, the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (the "Commission"), is the agency ofthe United States ofAmerica 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. §12117(a), which incorporates by reference Sections 706(f)(1) and (3) ofTitle VII, 42 U.S.C. §2000e-5(f)(I).
4. At all relevant times, Defendant, Wal-Mart Stores, Inc. ("Defendant" or "Wal-Mart"), has continuously been a Delaware corporation doing business in Hope Mills, North Carolina and has continuously had at least fifteen employees.
5. At all relevant times, Defendant has continuously been an employer engaged in an industry affecting commerce under 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 Sections 701(g) and (h) of Title VII, 42 U.s.C. §§2000e(g) and (h).
6. At all relevant times, Defendant has been a covered entity under Section 101(2) of the ADA, 42 U.S.C. §12111(2).
STATEMENT OF CLAIMS 7. More than thirty days prior to the institution of this lawsuit, Craig P. Smith filed charges with the Commission alleging violations of Title I of the ADA by Defendant Wal-Mart. All conditions precedent to the institution of this lawsuit have been fulfilled. 8. Since at least July I, 1998, Wal-Mart has continuously engaged in unlawful employment practices at its Hope Mills, North Carolina facility by discriminating against a
2

Case 5:01-cv-00090-BO Document 1 Filed 02/02/2001 Page 3 of 5
qualified applicant because ofhis disability, in violation of Section I02(a) of Title I of the ADA, 42 U.S.C. §12112(a). More specifically, Wal-Mart has refused to hire Craig P. Smith, a qualified deaf applicant.
9. The effect of the practices complained of in paragraph 8 above has been to deprive Craig P. Smith of equal employment opportunities and to otherwise adversely affect his status as an applicant for employment because of his disability.
10. The unlawful employment practices complained of in paragraphs 8 and 9 above were intentional.
11. The unlawful employment practices complained of in paragraphs 8 and 9 above were done with malice or with reckless indifference to the federally protected rights of Craig P. Smith.
PRAYER FOR RELIEF Wherefore, the Commission respectfully requests that this Court: A. Grant a permanent injunction enjoining Defendant Wal-Mart Stores, Inc., its officers, successors, assigns, and all persons in active concert or participation with it, from failing and refusing to hire qualified applicants for employment because oftheir disability and from any other employment practice which discriminates on the basis of disability. B. Order Defendant to institute and carry out policies, practices, and programs that provide equal employment opportunities for qualified individuals with disabilities, and which eradicate the effects of its past and present unlawful employment practices. C. Order Defendant to make whole Craig P. Smith by providing him with appropriate backpay with prejudgment interest, in amounts to be determined at trial, and other
3

Case 5:01-cv-00090-BO Document 1 Filed 02/02/2001 Page 4 of 5
affinnative relief necessary to eradicate the effects of Defendant's unlawful employment practices, including but not limited to rightful place hiring of Craig P. Smith or, in the alternative, an award of front pay.
D. Order Defendant to make whole Craig P. Smith by providing compensation for past and future pecuniary and non-pecuniary losses resulting from the unlawful practices complained of above, including but not limited to emotional pain, suffering, inconvenience, loss of enjoyment of life, humiliation, loss of self-esteem, and loss of civil rights, in amounts to be detennined at trial.
E. Order Defendant to pay Craig P. Smith punitive damages for its malicious and reckless conduct, as described above, in amounts to be detennined at trial.
F. Grant such further relief as the Court deems necessary and proper in the public interest.
G. 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. . I'}nd
DATED this _t-_ day ofFebruary, 2001. Respectfully submitted,
GWENDOLYN y. REAMS Associate General Counsel EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY
COMMISSION 1801 L Street, N.W. Washington, D.C. 20507
4

Case 5:01-cv-00090-BO Document 1 Filed 02/02/2001 Page 5 of 5
Supervisory Trial Attorney EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY
COMMISION Charlotte District Office 129 West Trade Street, Suite 400 Charlotte, North Carolina 28202
Trial Attorney EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY
COMMISSION Raleigh Area Office 1309 Annapolis Drive Raleigh, North Carolina 27608 (919) 865-4148
5

 
 Case 5:01-cv-00090-BO Document 24 Filed 12/05/2001 Page 1 of 1

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF NORTH CAROLINA
WESTERN DIVISION

No. 5:01-CV-90-BO(3)

EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY COMMISSION,
Plaintiff,
v.

oRDE R

WAL-MART STORES, INC., Defendant.

The court has pending before it a motion by the plaintiff to compel the defendant to comply with discovery. That motion has been briefed by the parties, and the court has examined the respective positions of the plaintiff and defendant. The plaintiff's motion to compel dated November 7, 2001, and filed in this court is allowed. The defendant is hereby ordered to comply with the discovery as requested. In the event that the defendant fails to comply with this order, appropriate sanctions will be
imposed. ? .aaQ.
This ~day of December, 2001.

;;4 DEC 5 LUUI

 
 Case 5:01-cv-00090-BO Document 25 Filed 01/07/2002 Page 1 of 8
"

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF NORTH CAROLINA
WESTERN DIVISION

FILED
[JJN

EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY

)

COMMISSION,

)

)

Plaintiff,

)

v.

)

)

WAL-MART STORES, INC.,

)

)

Defendant.

)

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

DAUVID W. DANIEL CLERK
S DISTRICT COURT E. D1ST. N. CftROUN.4
CIVIL ACTION NO. S:Ol-CV-90-BO(3)

CONSENT DECREE

The Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (the "Commission") filed this action against the Defendant, Wal-Mart Stores, Inc. ("Wal-Mart") to enforce Title I of the Americans with Disabilities Act, 42 U.S.C. § 12101, et seq. (the "ADA") and Title I of the Civil Rights Act of 1991, 42 U.S.C. § 1981a. The Commission's Complaint alleges that Wal-Mart discriminated against Craig P. Smith ("Mr. Smith") by refusing to hire him because of his disability. The Commission's Complaint seeks to recover backpay, front pay, compensatory damages, punitive damages and injunctive relief.
As a result of the parties having engaged in settlement negotiations, the parties agreed that this action should be finally resolved by entry of this Consent Decree. This case and twelve other ADA cases brought by the EEOC against Wal-Mart are being settled by separate consent decrees in conjunction with the settlement of EEOC v. Wal-Mart Stores, Inc., Civil Action No. S99-0414 GEB DAD (E.D. Cal.) (the "California Decree"), which includes nationwide equitable relief. This Consent Decree was entered into by the parties as an amicable way of resolving all outstanding differences that may have existed in this case. This Consent Decree is intended and does fully and finally resolve any and all claims arising out of the Complaint filed by the EEOC.
The parties stipulate to jurisdiction of the Court over the parties and do not object to the jurisdiction of the Court over this action.

d5

Case 5:01-cv-00090-BO Document 25 Filed 01/07/2002 Page 2 of 8
It is ORDERED, ADJUDGED AND DECREED: Having examined the terms and provisions of this Consent Decree and based on the pleadings, record, and stipulations of the parties, the Court finds the following: 1. This Consent Decree resolves all claims arising out of the issues between the Commission and Wal-Mart in this lawsuit, including, without limitation, back pay, front pay, compensatory and punitive damages, injunctive relief, costs, and attorneys' fees. 2. The Court has jurisdiction of the subject matter of this action and of the parties. 3. The terms and provisions of this Consent Decree are adequate, fair, reasonable, equitable, and just. The rights of the parties are adequately protected by this Consent Decree. 4. This Consent Decree conforms with the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure and the ADA and is not in derogation of the rights and privileges of any person. The entry of this Consent Decree will further the objectives of the ADA and will be in the best interests of Wal-Mart, the Commission, and the public.
I. NON-DISCRIMINATION 5. In all matters arising from or relating to employment, Wal-Mart and its officers, agents, employees, successors, and assigns, and all of those in active concert or participation with them, or any of them, shall not engage in any employment practice which unlawfully discriminates against an employee or applicant under the Americans with Disabilities Act. Prohibited discrimination includes, but is not limited to:
a. refusing to hire or rehire a qualified individual with a disability because of hislher disability;
b. refusing to provide a reasonable accommodation to a qualified individual with a disability;
c. discharging a qualified individual with a disability because of his/her disability;
2

Case 5:01-cv-00090-BO Document 25 Filed 01/07/2002 Page 3 of 8
.-
d. maintaining any practice or policy that violates the ADA by depriving or tending to deprive any individual of employment opportunities because of such individual's disability;
e. discriminating against persons on the basis of their disabilities in the terms and conditions of their employment; and,
f. making disability related pre-employment inquiries. II. NON-RETALIATION
6. Wal-Mart, its officers, agents, employees, successors, assigns, and all those in active concert or participation with them, or any of them, ~hall not engage in reprisal or retaliation of any kind against Mr. Smith or any person because such person:
a. opposed any practice made unlawful under the ADA; b. filed a charge of discrimination with the Commission or a state agency or
testified or participated in any manner in any investigation, proceeding, or hearing under the ADA; c. requested and/or received relief in accordance with this Consent Decree; d. participated in any manner in this action or in the investigation giving rise to this action; or e. asserted any rights under this Consent Decree. III. MONETARY RELIEF AND JOB OFFER 7. Within fifteen (15) days after this Consent Decree is approved by the Court, WalMart shall make payment in the form of a business check made payable to Mr. Smith, and will send a copy of the check to Mindy E. Weinstein, Regional Attorney, Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, 129 West Trade Street, Suite 400, Charlotte, NC 28202, made payable to him in the gross amount of $ 173,486.70, including: a. $ 27,571.98 for back pay, less only any applicable deductions for the employee's portion of FICA and applicable federal and state income tax wi thholdings;
3

Case 5:01-cv-00090-BO Document 25 Filed 01/07/2002 Page 4 of 8
"
b. $ 3,754.28 for interest on the back pay; and, c. $ 142,160.44 for compensatory damages. Wal-Mart shall be responsible for reporting the amount paid to the Internal Revenue Service and shall be responsible for paying the employer's share of FUTA and FICA on any amounts designated as backpay. Wal-Mart will issue a United States Internal Revenue Service Form 1099 to Mr. Smith for the amounts designated as interest and compensatory damages. 8. Within thirty (30) days after this Decree is approved by the Court, Wal-Mart will offer Mr. Smith full or part-time employment, at his option, at the Distribution Center facility in Hope Mills, North Carolina with any necessary reasonable accommodations, at the wage he would have been making if he had been hired by Wal-Mart and continued working there. If Mr. Smith accepts Wal-Mart's offer of employment, Mr. Smith will be awarded the effective corporate service date of July 6, 1998 after completion of the 90-day probationary period. This date will be the basis for determining their entitlement to wages and benefits, consistent with all applicable Wal-Mart policies and procedures for hourly employees. Wal-Mart will enroll Mr. Smith in any and all benefits, including but not limited to, health and dental benefits, effective the first day of employment. Wal-Mart agrees to provide all necessary reasonable accommodations to Mr. Smith, which will include, but not be limited to, a qualified sign language interpreter for meetings and evaluations, access to at TTY phone, a vibrating pager, and pencils and paper for written communications with co-workers and supervisors. IV. EMPLOYMENT PRACTICES AND TRAINING 9. As outlined above, the parties to this Consent Decree have agreed to the entry of the California Decree to resolve certain nationwide issues. In the California Decree, the parties agreed that Wal-Mart would not engage in any employment practice which violates the ADA, not retaliate against any person who exercises rights under the ADA, make monetary payments to individuals adversely affected by Wal-Mart's disability related inquiries before job offers were made, establish an ADA Coordinator position, revise its ADA Policies and Procedures, establish Reasonable Accommodation Procedures, appoint a Special Master, abolish the Matrix of
4

."

Case 5:01-cv-00090-BO Document 25 Filed 01/07/2002 Page 5 of 8

Essential Job Functions within six months, post notices nationwide, include an ADA component in its periodic personnel audits, include ADA compliance in managers' and applicable human resource associates' performance evaluations, maintain employee record information, and make annual reports to the EEOC and the Special Master concerning its compliance with the Consent Decree and the ADA.
In the California Decree, the parties also agreed that Wal-Mart will provide nationwide training to all managers, supervisors and people involved in hiring committees concerning the requirements of the ADA. The training will include: an interactive component; an overview of the ADA; Wal-Mart's obligations under the ADA; applicant and employee rights under the ADA; non-discrimination in hiring and recruitment; reasonable accommodation in the application and hiring process; procedures for addressing reasonable accommodation requests in the application and hiring process; examples of accommodations in the application and hiring process for people with disabilities, including people who are deaf or hearing impaired; awareness of issues affecting employees and applicants who have disabilities; that any decision about undue hardship in the provision of a reasonable accommodation shall be made by the ADA Coordinator; Wal-Mart's commitment to meeting the requirements of the ADA; and, Wal-Mart's commitment to engage in the interactive process required by the ADA for qualified individuals with disabilities to determine an appropriate accommodation at the time a potential employee applies for a position with Wal-Mart, after Wal-Mart hires an employee, and during an employee's period of employment with Wal-Mart.
The parties agree and understand that any issue related to Wal-Mart's compliance with the provisions of the California Decree shall be decided by the California Court.
10. Within six (6) months of Mr. Smith accepting Wal-Mart's offer of employment outlined above, Wal-Mart agrees to provide the ADA training described in paragraph 9 for its management employees at the location of Mr. Smith's employment.
11. Wal-Mart agrees to invite a Commission representative to attend all ADA training sessions described in paragraph 10 by sending a written invitation to the Regional Attorney of
5

Case 5:01-cv-00090-BO Document 25 Filed 01/07/2002 Page 6 of 8
the Charlotte District Office at 129 west Trade Street, Suite 400, Charlotte, North Carolina, 28202, at least ten (10) days prior to the training.
V. POSTING OF NOTICE 12. Within thirty (30) days of the entry of this Decree, Wal-Mart will post the Notice attached as Exhibit A in the Hope Mills, North Carolina Distribution Center and the Distribution Center which employs Mr. Smith. The Notice will be posted in the same approximate locations as the other labor and employment postings for the duration of this Consent Decree. The Notice shall be the same type, size, and style as Exhibit "A".
VI. COMPLIANCE 13. In the event that the Commission believes that Wal-Mart has failed to comply with any provisions(s) of the Consent Decree, it shall:
a. notify Wal-Mart in writing of the alleged non-compliance by fax and by overnight mail to the individual who signs this Consent Decree on behalf of Wal-Mart, using the fax number and address shown below, and,
b. afford Wal-Mart forty-five (45) business days, after service of notice to remedy the non-compliance.
14. If Wal-Mart has not remedied the alleged non-compliance within forty-five (45) business days, the EEOC may petition the Court to enforce the terms of this Consent Decree at any time during which this Court maintains jurisdiction over this action.
15. In the event the Court finds that Wal-Mart has violated this Consent Decree, the Court may order appropriate relief to remedy the non-compliance, including attorneys' fees, daily fines, and appropriate injunctive relief.
16. The parties shall bear their respective attorneys' fees and costs incurred in this action up to the date of entry of this Consent Decree.
VII. DURATION OF CONSENT DECREE 17. This Court shall retain jurisdiction of this action for a period of two (2) years after entry of the Consent Decree. This Consent Decree shall expire by its own terms at the end of
6

Case 5:01-cv-00090-BO Document 25 Filed 01/07/2002 Page 7 of 8

four (4) years without further action by the parties.

if: ~ ENTERED this3 ,

200!.

UNITED STATES DISTRICT J

APPROVED AND CONSENTED TO THIs...3.L DAY OF DECEMBER, 2001:

WAL-MART STO~S~ I~ ~

by'.~/a-~
~ A. WHITTAKER

::

Senior Corporate Litigation Counsel

Wal-Mart Stores, Inc. 702 S.W. 8th Street

Bentonville, AR 72716-9759

(501) 273-4505

and
by:Q~:tA~~
RICHARD M. FEATHERS Womble Carlyle Sandridge & Rice
150 Fayetteville Street Mall, Suite 2100
Raleigh, NC 27602
(919) 755-2169

COUNSEL FOR DEFENDANT

EQUAL EMPLOYMENT
OPPORTUNITY COMMISSION
GWENDOLYN YOUNG REAMS Associate General Counsel
EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY COMMISSION 1801 "L" Street, N.W. Washington, D.C. 20507
MINDY E. WEINSTEIN Regional Attorney
LYNETTE A. BARNES Supervisory Trial Attorney 129 West Trade Street, Suite 400 Charlotte, NC 28202
~ ~ bY:---J-~~~=-~-=-_=.=.IO~-:: KERITH COHEN Trial Attorney 1309 Annapolis Drive Raleigh, NC 27608 (919) 856-4148

COUNSEL FOR PLAINTIFF

7

•

Case 5:01-cv-00090-BO Document 25 Filed 01/07/2002 Page 8 of 8

NOTICE OF NON-DISCRIMINATION
This Notice is being posted pursuant to a Consent Decree voluntarily entered into by Wal-Mart Stores. Inc. ("Wal-Mart") and the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission ("EEOC") in connection to the settlement in the case titled EEOC v. Wal-Mart Stores, Inc .• Civil Action No. 5:01-CV-90-BO(3).
The EEOC lawsuit alleged that Wal-Mart violated the Americans With Disabilities Act ("ADA") by failing to hire an applicant because of his disability.
Under the terms of the Consent Decree. Wal-Mart has agreed to:
1. Not engage in any employment practice which violates the ADA; 2. Not retaliate against any person who exercises his or her rights under the ADA; 3. Make monetary payment to the affected applicant; 4. Provide training to all managers and supervisors and people involved hiring committees concerning the
requirements of the ADA; 5. Revise ADA Policies and Procedures; and. 6. Post this Notice.
Federal law prohibits covered employers from discriminating against any employee or applicant for employment on the basis of disability. sex. race. color. national origin. or age, and from retaliation. Should you have any complaints of discrimination or retaliation. you can contact the EEOC. EEOC charges no fee for their services and has employees who speak languages other than English. An employee may contact the EEOC at the following address and telephone number for the purpose of filing a charge of employment discrimination.
Equal Employment Opportunity Commission Raleigh Area Office 1309 Annapolis Drive
Raleigh. North Carolina 27608 Tel: (919) 856-4064
Dated:_ _ _ _ __
THIS IS AN OFFICIAL NOTICE AND MUST NOT BE DEFACED BY ANYONE
This Notice must remain posted for two (2) years from the date shown above and must not be altered, defaced, or covered by any other material. Any questions concerning this Notice or compliance with its provisions may be directed to the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission. 1-800-669-4000 or TTY 1-800-6696820.
EXHIBIT A

 
 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF NORTH CAROLINA
WESTERN DIVISION

No. 5:01-CV-90-BO(3)

EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY COMMISSION,
Plaintiff,

v.

o RDE R

WAL-MART STORES, INC., Defendant.

The court has considered the defendant's motion for a protective order and finds it to be without merit. The motion is denied.
ThiS~T"d'!a+y" of November, 2001.

 
 CM/ECF - NCED - Docket Report

Page 1 of 4

CLOSED
U.S. District Court EASTERN DISTRICT OF NORTH CAROLINA (Western Division)
CIVIL DOCKET FOR CASE #: 5:01-cv-00090-BO

EEOC v. Wal-Mart Stores, Inc Assigned to: Judge Terrence W. Boyle Demand: $0 Cause: 42:12101 The Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990

Date Filed: 02/02/2001 Jury Demand: Plaintiff Nature of Suit: 442 Civil Rights: Jobs Jurisdiction: U.S. Government Plaintiff

Plaintiff EEOC

represented by Kerith Cohen Equal Employment Opportunity Commission 1309 Annapolis Dr. Raleigh, NC 27608 919-865-4148 Email: kerith.cohen@eeoc.gov LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

Lynette A. Barnes EEOC/ Charlotte District Officed 129 West Trade St. Suite 400 Charlotte, NC 28202-5306 704-344-6878 Fax: 704-344-6780 Email: lynette.barnes@eeoc.gov LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

Mindy E. Weinstein E. E. O. C. 129 W. Trade St. Suite 400 Charlotte, NC 29202-2799 704-344-6886 LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

V. Defendant Wal-Mart Stores, Incorporated

represented by Richard M. Feathers N. C. Electric Membership Corp.

https://ecf.nced.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/DktRpt.pl?690525207864446-L_923_0-1

5/29/2007

CM/ECF - NCED - Docket Report

Page 2 of 4

Date Filed 02/02/2001 03/02/2001 03/19/2001 03/21/2001 04/09/2001 04/09/2001 04/11/2001 04/12/2001
04/24/2001
04/26/2001 04/27/2001
09/28/2001

rick.feathers@ncemcs.com P. O. Box 27306 Raleigh, NC 27611-7306 919-875-3121 Fax: 872-2845 LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

#

Docket Text

1 Complaint filed; Americans With Disabilities Act; JURY DEMAND. (fdc) (Entered: 02/05/2001)

2 Waiver of Service Returned Executed as to Wal-Mart Stores, Inc 2/2/01 Answer due on 4/3/01 for Wal-Mart Stores, Inc (fdc) (Entered: 03/08/2001)

3 Answer to Complaint by Wal-Mart Stores, Inc (fdc) (Entered: 03/21/2001)

4 Request for Discovery Plan: Discovery Plan due by 5/5/01 (fdc) (Entered: 03/21/2001)

5 Motion for limited admisstion by Wal-Mart Stores, Inc for Linda A. Whitaker to appear pro hac vice (fdc) (Entered: 04/11/2001)

6 Affidavit of Linda A. Whittaker by Wal-Mart Stores, Inc Re: [5-1] motion for Linda A. Whitaker to appear pro hac vice (fdc) (Entered: 04/11/2001)

Motion(s) referred: referred [5-1] motion for Linda A. Whitaker to appear pro hac vice to USMJ William A. Webb (fdc) (Entered: 04/11/2001)

7 Order denying [5-1] motion for Linda A. Whitaker to appear pro hac vice signed by William A. Webb, USMJ. Counsel are referred to E.D.N.C. Local Rule 2.05. The EDNC does not use the practice of appearance pro hac vice. OB Ref: BO 17, p. 178; served. (fdc) (Entered: 04/12/2001)

8 Notice of attorney appearance for Wal-Mart Stores, Inc by Linda A. Whitaker, Esq., Senior Corporate Litigation Counsel, Wal-Mart Stores, Inc.; Telephone number: 501-273-4505; Fax number: 510-277-5991. (fdc) (Entered: 04/26/2001)

9 Discovery Plan filed by EEOC, Wal-Mart Stores, Inc; cy to J. Webb for scheduling order. (fdc) (Entered: 04/27/2001)

10 Order on Scheduling by Magistrate Judge Webb setting Discovery cutoff 10/31/01 Deadline for filing of all motions 11/30/01 Expert Witness List due from plaintiff on 8/15/01 and from defendant on 9/15/01 Jury Trial scheduled no earlier than 4/8/02 before Terrence W. Boyle, USDJ; served. (fdc) (Entered: 04/27/2001)

11 Joint motion by EEOC, Wal-Mart Stores, Inc to extend discovery (fdc)

https://ecf.nced.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/DktRpt.pl?690525207864446-L_923_0-1

5/29/2007

CM/ECF - NCED - Docket Report

Page 3 of 4

09/28/2001 10/01/2001
10/15/2001 10/15/2001 10/18/2001
10/19/2001 10/19/2001 11/02/2001
11/05/2001 11/07/2001 11/07/2001 11/09/2001 11/13/2001
11/20/2001 11/21/2001
11/27/2001 12/05/2001

(Entered: 09/28/2001)
Motion(s) referred: referred [11-1] joint motion to extend discovery to USMJ William A. Webb (fdc) (Entered: 09/28/2001)
12 Order granting [11-1] joint motion to extend discovery, reset discovery due for 11/30/01 , reset motion filing deadline for 12/31/01 signed by William A. Webb, USMJ. Served. (fdc) (Entered: 10/01/2001)
13 Motion by EEOC, Wal-Mart Stores, Inc to extend discovery (fdc) (Entered: 10/15/2001)
Motion(s) referred: referred [13-1] motion to extend discovery to USMJ William A. Webb (fdc) (Entered: 10/15/2001)
14 Order granting [13-1] motion to extend discovery, reset discovery due for 12/31/01 , reset motion filing deadline for 1/31/02 signed by William A. Webb, USMJ. OB Ref: BO # 19, p. 52. (fdc) (Entered: 10/26/2001)
15 Motion by Wal-Mart Stores, Inc for protective order (fdc) (Entered: 10/26/2001)
16 Memorandum by Wal-Mart Stores, Inc in support of [15-1] motion for protective order w/ attached exhibits 1-4. (fdc) (Entered: 10/26/2001)
17 Supplemental Memorandum by defendant Wal-Mart Stores, Inc in support of [15-1] motion for protective order w/ attachments. (fdc) (Entered: 11/06/2001)
18 Memorandum by EEOC in opposition to [15-1] motion for protective order w/ attached exhibits A-D. (fdc) (Entered: 11/06/2001)
19 Motion by EEOC to compel (fdc) (Entered: 11/14/2001)
20 Memorandum by EEOC in support of [19-1] motion to compel w/ attached exhibits A-E. (fdc) (Entered: 11/14/2001)
Motion(s) referred: referred [15-1] motion for protective order to USMJ William A. Webb (fdc) (Entered: 11/09/2001)
21 Document filed by plaintiff EEOC titled: Plaintiff EEOC's Memorandum in Response to Defendant's Supplemental Materials. (fdc) (Entered: 11/20/2001)
22 Response by Wal-Mart Stores, Inc to [19-1] motion to compel(fdc) Modified on 11/27/2001 (Entered: 11/24/2001)
23 Order denying [15-1] motion for protective order signed by Terrence W. Boyle, USDJ. OB Ref: BO # 19, p. 95; served. (fdc) Modified on 11/27/2001 (Entered: 11/21/2001)
Motion(s) submitted to Judge Boyle: [19-1] motion to compel submitted (fdc) (Entered: 11/27/2001)
24 Order granting [19-1] motion to compel signed by Terrence W. Boyle, USDJ. The defendant is hereby ordered to comply with discovery as

https://ecf.nced.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/DktRpt.pl?690525207864446-L_923_0-1

5/29/2007

CM/ECF - NCED - Docket Report

Page 4 of 4

12/26/2001 01/07/2002 01/07/2002

requested. In the event that the defendant fails to comply with this order, appropriate sanctions will be imposed. OB Ref: BO # 19, p. 106; served. (fdc) (Entered: 12/05/2001)
Forwarded consent decree to Judge Boyle for signature. (fdc) (Entered: 12/26/2001)
25 Consent judgment for EEOC against Wal-Mart Stores, Inc signed by Terrence W. Boyle, USDJ. OB Ref: BO # 19, p. 161; served. (fdc) (Entered: 01/17/2002)
Case closed; non-perm. (fdc) (Entered: 01/17/2002)

PACER Service Center
Transaction Receipt

05/29/2007 16:19:13

PACER Login: hs0328

Client Code: eeoc

Description: Docket Report Search Criteria: 5:01-cv-00090-BO

Billable Pages: 2

Cost:

0.16

https://ecf.nced.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/DktRpt.pl?690525207864446-L_923_0-1

5/29/2007