,

IN THE UNITED STATES,DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF INDIANA "

SOUTH BEND DIVISION

" '" i
FL'i~i.

EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY

)

,I
.. ,.,', ,I
Lrj' l'IL.",>< \,1\

'.f
StRlcr

COMMISSION,

Plaintiff,

)

) )

II CV CIVIL ACTICJ ~O '6 12RlIl

)

v.

)

)

COMPLAINT

DAMPING TECHNOLOGIES, INC.,

)

)

JURY TRIAL DEMAND

Defendant.

)

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

NATURE OF THE ACTION This is an action under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, Title I ofthe Civil Rights Act of 1991, the Age Discrimination in Employment Act, and Titles I and V ofthe Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990 to correct an unlawful employment practice on the basis of retaliation and to provide appropriate relief to Mary Steely. The Commission alleges that Defendant terminated Mary Steely in retaliation for filing a charge of discrimination, in violation of Title VII ofthe Civil Rights Act, the Age Discrimination in Employment Act, and the Americans with Disabilities Act.
JURISDICTION AND VENUE 1. Jurisdiction ofthis Court is invoked pursuant to 28 U.S.c. §§ 451, 1331, 1337, 1343, and 1345. This action is authorized and instituted pursuant to Section 706 (f)(1) and (3) of Title VII ofthe Civil Rights Act of 1964, as amended, 42 U.S.c. § 2000 e-5(f)(1) and (3) ("Title VII") and Section 102 ofthe Civil Rights Act of 1991,42 U.S.C. § 1981a; Section 7(b) of the Age Discrimination in Employment Act of 1967, as amended, 29 U.S.c. § 626(b) (the "ADEA"),

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

(the "FLSA"), as amended, 29 U.S.C. §§ 216(c) and 217; and Section 107(a) of the Americans

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

reference Section 706(f)(1) and (3) of Title VII, 42 U.S.C. § 2000e-5(f)(I) and (3). '

2.

The employment practice alleged to be unlawful was committed within the

jurisdiction of the United States Court for the Northern District of Indiana, South Bend Division.

PARTIES

3. 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, the ADEA, and Title I of the ADA, and is expressly authorized to bring

this action by Section 706 (f)(1) and (3) of Title VII, 42 U.S.C. § 2000e-5 (f) (1) and (3); Section

7(b) of the ADEA, 29 U.S.C. § 626(b), as amended by Section 2 of Reorganization Plan No.1 of

1978,92 Stat. 3781, and by Public Law 98-532 (1984), 98 Stat. 2705; and by Section 107(a) of

the ADA, 42 U.S.C. § 12117(a), which incorporates by reference Section 706(f)(1) and (3),

42 U.S.C. § 2000e-5(f)(I) and (3).

4. At all relevant times, Defendant, Damping Technologies, Inc., (the "Employer"),

has continuously been an Ohio corporation, doing business in the State of Indiana and the City of

Mishawaka, and has continuously had at least 20 employees.

5. At all relevant times, Defendant Employer has continuously been an employer

engaged in an industry affecting commerce within the meaning of Sections 701 (b), (g), and (h) of

Title VII, 42 U.S.C. §§ 2000e(b), (g), and (h); Sections II(b), (g), and (h) of the ADEA, 29

U.S.c. §§ 630(b), (g), and (h); and Section 101(5) of the ADA, 42 U.S.C. § 12111(5), and

2

1
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 Employer has been a covered entity under Section 101(2) of the ADA, 42 U.S.c. § 12111(2).
CONCILIATION 7. Prior to institution of this lawsuit, the Commission's representatives attempted to eliminate the unlawful employment practice alleged below and to effect voluntary compliance with the ADEA through informal methods of conciliation, conference, and persuasion within the
I
meaning of Section 7(b) of the ADEA, 29 U.S.c. § 626(b). STATEMENT OF CLAIMS
8. More than thirty days prior to the institution ofthis lawsuit, Mary Steely filed a charge with the Commission alleging violations of Title VII and Titles I and V of the ADA by Defendant Employer. All conditions precedent to the institution of this lawsuit have been fulfilled.
9. On or about July 21,2003, Defendant Employer engaged in an unlawful employment practice at its Mishawaka, Indiana, facility, in violation of Section 704(a) of Title VII, 42 U.S.C. § 2000e-3(a); Section 4 of the ADEA, 29 U.S.C. § 623(d); and Section 503 of Title V ofthe ADA, 42 U.S.c. § 12203. Defendant Employer discharged Mary Steely in retaliation for filing a charge of discrimination.
10. The effect of the practice complained of in paragraph 9 above has been to deprive Mary Steely of equal employment opportunities and otherwise adversely affect her status as an employee, because of retaliation.
3

11. The unlawful employment practice complained of in paragraph 9 above was intentional.
12. The unlawful employment practice complained of in paragraph 9 above was done with malice or with reckless indifference to the federally protected rights of Mary Steely.
13. The unlawful employment practice complained of in paragraph 9 above was willful within the meaning of Section 7(b) of the ADEA, 29 U.S.C. § 626(b).
PRAYER FOR RELIEF Wherefore, the Commission respectfully requests that this Court: A. Grant a permanent injunction enjoining Defendant Employer, its officers, successors, assigns, and all persons in active concert or participation with it, from discharging employees because they have filed charges of discrimination and any other employment practice which discriminates on the basis of retaliation. B. Order Defendant Employer to institute and carry out policies, practices, and programs which provide equal employment opportunities for employees who have filed charges of discrimination, and which eradicate the effects of its past and present unlawful employment practices. C. Order Defendant Employers to make whole Mary Steely by providing appropriate backpay with prejudgment interest, in amounts to be determined at trial, and other affirmative relief necessary to eradicate the effects of its unlawful employment practices, including but not limited to rightful place reinstatement or in the alternative an award of front pay to Mary Steely. D. Grant a judgment requiring Defendant Employer to pay appropriate back wages in an amount to be determined at trial, and an equal sum as liquidated damages, or prejudgment
4

interest in lieu thereofto the individual whose wages are being unlawfully withheld as a result of the acts complained of above, including but not limited to Mary Steely.
E. Order Defendant Employer to make whole Mary Steely by providing compensation for past and future pecuniary losses resulting from the unlawful employment practice described in paragraph 9 above, including but not limited to out of pocket expenses, plus prejudgment interest, in amounts to be determined at trial.
I
F. Order Defendant Employer to make whole Mary Steely by providing compensation for past and future nonpecuniary losses resulting from the unlawful practice complained of in paragraph 9 above, including but not limited to physical and emotional pain and suffering, mental anguish, and loss of enjoyment of life, in amounts to be determined at trial.
G. Order Defendant Employer to pay Mary Steely punitive damages for its malicious and reckless conduct described in paragraph 9 above, in amounts to be determined at trial.
H. Grant such further relief as the Court deems necessary and proper in the public interest.
I. Award the Commission its costs of this action.
JURy TRIAL DEMAND The Commission requests a jury trial on all questions of fact raised by its complaint.
Respectfully Submitted, ERIC S. DREIBAND General Counsel JAMES L. LEE Deputy General Counsel
5

GWENDOLYN YOUNG REAMS Associate General Counsel
~IL~
KE TH L. BIRD, #10780-02 Senior Trial Attorney EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY COMMISSION Indianapolis District Office 101 West Ohio Street, Suite 1900 Indianapolis In 46204-4203 Phone: (317) 226-7204 Fax: (317) 226-5571 Email: Kenneth.Bird@eeoc.gov
6

 
 FILED: 12/6/04

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF INDIANA
SOUTH BEND DIVISION

EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY COMMISSION,
Plaintiff, v. DAMPING TECHNOLOGIES, INC.,
Defendant.

)

)

)

CIVIL ACTION NO.

)

3:04-CV-612-RM

)

)

AMENDED

)

COMPLAINT

)

)

JURY TRIAL DEMAND

)

)

NATURE OF THE ACTION This is an action under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, Title I of the Civil Rights Act of 1991, the Age Discrimination in Employment Act, and Titles I and V of the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990 to correct an unlawful employment practice on the basis of retaliation and to provide appropriate relief to Mary Steely. The Commission alleges that Defendant terminated Mary Steely in retaliation for filing a charge of discrimination, in violation of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act, the Age Discrimination in Employment Act, and the Americans with Disabilities Act.
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 706 (f)(1) and (3) of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, as amended, 42 U.S.C. § 2000 e-5(f)(1) and (3) (“Title VII”) and Section 102 of the Civil Rights Act of 1991, 42 U.S.C. § 1981a; Section 7(b) of the Age Discrimination in Employment Act of 1967, as amended, 29 U.S.C. § 626(b) (the “ADEA”),

which incorporates by reference Sections 16(c) and 17 of the Fair Labor Standards Act of 1938 (the “FLSA”), as amended, 29 U.S.C. §§ 216(c) and 217; and Section 107(a) of the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990 (the “ADA”), 42 U.S.C. § 12117(a), which incorporates by reference Section 706(f)(1) and (3) of Title VII, 42 U.S.C. § 2000e-5(f)(1) and (3).
2. The employment practice alleged to be unlawful was committed within the jurisdiction of the United States Court for the Northern District of Indiana, South Bend Division.
PARTIES 3. 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, the ADEA, and Title I of the ADA, and is expressly authorized to bring this action by Section 706 (f)(1) and (3) of Title VII, 42 U.S.C. § 2000e-5 (f) (1) and (3); Section 7(b) of the ADEA, 29 U.S.C. § 626(b), as amended by Section 2 of Reorganization Plan No. 1 of 1978, 92 Stat. 3781, and by Public Law 98-532 (1984), 98 Stat. 2705; and by Section 107(a) of the ADA, 42 U.S.C. § 12117(a), which incorporates by reference Section 706(f)(1) and (3), 42 U.S.C. § 2000e-5(f)(1) and (3). 4. At all relevant times, Defendant, Damping Technologies, Inc., (the “Employer”), has continuously been an Ohio corporation, doing business in the State of Indiana and the City of Mishawaka, and has continuously had at least 20 employees. 5. At all relevant times, Defendant Employer has continuously been an employer engaged in an industry affecting commerce within the meaning of Sections 701(b), (g), and (h) of Title VII, 42 U.S.C. §§ 2000e(b), (g), and (h); Sections 11(b), (g), and (h) of the ADEA, 29 U.S.C. §§ 630(b), (g), and (h); and Section 101(5) of the ADA, 42 U.S.C. § 12111(5), and
2

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 Employer has been a covered entity under Section 101(2) of the ADA, 42 U.S.C. § 12111(2).
CONCILIATION 7. Prior to institution of this lawsuit, the Commission’s representatives attempted to eliminate the unlawful employment practice alleged below and to effect voluntary compliance with the ADEA through informal methods of conciliation, conference, and persuasion within the meaning of Section 7(b) of the ADEA, 29 U.S.C. § 626(b).
STATEMENT OF CLAIMS 8. More than thirty days prior to the institution of this lawsuit, Mary Steely filed a charge with the Commission alleging violations of Title VII and Titles I and V of the ADA by Defendant Employer. All conditions precedent to the institution of this lawsuit have been fulfilled. 9. On or about July 21, 2003, Defendant Employer engaged in an unlawful employment practice at its Mishawaka, Indiana, facility, in violation of Section 704(a) of Title VII, 42 U.S.C. § 2000e-3(a); Section 4 of the ADEA, 29 U.S.C. § 623(d); and Section 503 of Title V of the ADA, 42 U.S.C. § 12203. Defendant Employer discharged Mary Steely in retaliation for filing a charge of discrimination. 10. The effect of the practice complained of in paragraph 9 above has been to deprive Mary Steely of equal employment opportunities and otherwise adversely affect her status as an employee, because of retaliation.
3

11. The unlawful employment practice complained of in paragraph 9 above was intentional.
12. The unlawful employment practice complained of in paragraph 9 above was done with malice or with reckless indifference to the federally protected rights of Mary Steely.
13. The unlawful employment practice complained of in paragraph 9 above was willful within the meaning of Section 7(b) of the ADEA, 29 U.S.C. § 626(b).
PRAYER FOR RELIEF Wherefore, the Commission respectfully requests that this Court: A. Grant a permanent injunction enjoining Defendant Employer, its officers, successors, assigns, and all persons in active concert or participation with it, from discharging employees because they have filed charges of discrimination and any other employment practice which discriminates on the basis of retaliation. B. Order Defendant Employer to institute and carry out policies, practices, and programs which provide equal employment opportunities for employees who have filed charges of discrimination, and which eradicate the effects of its past and present unlawful employment practices. C. Order Defendant Employers to make whole Mary Steely by providing appropriate backpay with prejudgment interest, in amounts to be determined at trial, and other affirmative relief necessary to eradicate the effects of its unlawful employment practices, including but not limited to rightful place reinstatement or in the alternative an award of front pay to Mary Steely. D. Grant a judgment requiring Defendant Employer to pay appropriate back wages in an amount to be determined at trial, and an equal sum as liquidated damages, or prejudgment
4

interest in lieu thereof to the individual whose wages are being unlawfully withheld as a result of the acts complained of above, including but not limited to Mary Steely.
E. Order Defendant Employer to make whole Mary Steely by providing compensation for past and future pecuniary losses resulting from the unlawful employment practice described in paragraph 9 above, including but not limited to out of pocket expenses, plus prejudgment interest, in amounts to be determined at trial.
F. Order Defendant Employer to pay Mary Steely punitive damages for its malicious and reckless conduct described in paragraph 9 above, in amounts to be determined at trial.
G. Grant such further relief as the Court deems necessary and proper in the public interest.
H. Award the Commission its costs of this action.
JURY TRIAL DEMAND The Commission requests a jury trial on all questions of fact raised by its complaint.
Respectfully Submitted, ERIC S. DREIBAND General Counsel JAMES L. LEE Deputy General Counsel GWENDOLYN YOUNG REAMS Associate General Counsel LAURIE A. YOUNG, #11480-49 Regional Attorney MICHELLE EISELE, #12070-49 Supervisory Trial Attorney
5

/s/ Kenneth L. Bird KENNETH L. BIRD, #10780-02 Senior Trial Attorney EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY COMMISSION Indianapolis District Office 101 West Ohio Street, Suite 1900 Indianapolis In 46204-4203 Phone: (317) 226-7204 Fax: (317) 226-5571 Email: Kenneth.Bird@eeoc.gov
6

 
 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF INDIANA
SOUTH BEND DIVISION

EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY COMMISSION,
Plaintiff v. DAMPING TECHNOLOGIES, INC.,
Defendant

)

)

)

)

)

CAUSE NO. 3:04-CV-612 RM

)

)

)

)

)

CONSENT DECREE

The Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (“Commission” or “EEOC”) instituted

Civil Action No. 3:04-CV-612 under the authority granted by Section 706 (f)(1) and (3) of

Title VII the Civil Rights Act of 1964, as amended, 42 U.S.C. § 2000e-5 (f) (1) and (3) (“Title

VII”); Section 7(b) of the Age Discrimination in Employment Act of 1967, as amended, 29

U.S.C. § 626(b), as amended by Section 2 of Reorganization Plan No. 1 of 1978, 92 Stat. 3781,

and by Public Law 98-532 (1984), 98 Stat. 2705 (“ADEA”); Section 107(a) of the Americans

with Disabilities Act of 1990, as amended, 42 U.S.C. § 12117(a) (“ADA”); and Section 102 of

Title I of the Civil Rights Act of 1991, 42 U.S.C. § 1981a. The EEOC’s action was brought to

correct unlawful employment practices on the basis of retaliation.

The Commission and Defendant Damping Technologies, Inc. (“Damping”) hereby

stipulate to the jurisdiction of the Court over the parties and the subject matter.

The parties have advised the Court that they desire to resolve Civil Action No. 3:04-CV-

612 without the burden, expense, and delay of further litigation.

It is, therefore, the finding of the Court, based on the pleadings and the record as a whole,

that: (1) the Court has jurisdiction over the parties and the subject matter of this action; (2)

implementation of this Decree will advance the purposes and provisions of Title VII, the ADEA, and the ADA; and (3) this Consent Decree resolves all matters and claims in controversy in this lawsuit between the EEOC and Damping as provided in paragraphs 1 through 13 below.
IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED, ADJUDGED, AND DECREED as follows: 1. Damping will not discriminate against any employee on the basis of age, disability, race, color, religion, sex, or national origin and will comply with all provisions of Title VII, the ADEA, and the ADA. 2. Damping will not retaliate or discriminate against any of its employees, former employees, or applicants for employment because the individual (a) has made a charge or opposed an unlawful employment practice under Title VII, the ADEA, the ADA or any of the laws enforced by the EEOC or (b) has assisted or participated in any manner in an investigation, proceeding, or hearing under Title VII, the ADEA, the ADA or any of the laws enforced by the EEOC. 3. Damping agrees to post the Notice of Non-Discrimination Policy attached to this Decree as Appendix A in conspicuous locations visible to applicants and employees throughout its Mishawaka, Indiana, facility. Said notices shall remain posted throughout the term of this Decree. 4. Damping shall pay $38,571.46 in back pay, $2,500.00 in interest, and $23,928.54 in front pay, for a total of $65,000.00, to Mary Steely or her heirs or assigns in the event of her death. The payment shall be made in two installments, ½ on or before May 1, 2005 (or within seven days of notification as provided in ¶ 5, whichever is later), and the second ½ on or before August 1, 2005. Two checks in the amount of $32,500, less applicable taxes and withholdings, shall be
2

made payable to Mary Steely and sent to her by certified mail at 214 North Middleboro Avenue, Mishawaka, Indiana, 46544. Damping will not deduct from any amount the employer’s share of any costs, taxes, or social security required by law to be paid by Damping. Further, Damping will not withhold any amounts from payments of liquidated damages, interest, or punitive damages. 5. Before Damping is required to make a payment pursuant to ¶ 4, the Commission will notify counsel for Damping when it has received an executed release (Appendix B) and will forward a copy of the executed release to counsel. 6. Within seven days of receipt of notice from the EEOC that Ms. Steely has executed the release (or May 1, 2005, whichever is later), Damping shall mail the first check as provided in ¶ 4 above. Damping shall mail the second check on or before August 1, 2005. Damping shall mail copies of the checks and proof of their delivery (signed certified mail receipts) to the Commission. Then, the Commission promptly will deliver the original release to Damping’s counsel. 7. Damping shall adopt and implement a training program for all of its supervisors and managers at its Mishawaka, Indiana, facility. This training shall cover what constitute unlawful employment practices under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, the Age Discrimination in Employment Act of 1967, and the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990, with particular emphasis on the non-retaliation provisions of the statutes. The training must be conducted within 120 days from the date of entry of this Decree. Thirty days before the training, Damping shall provide notice to the Commission of the date, time, and place of the training, and shall send to the Commission a copy of the training program and all written materials, if any, to be used.
3

The Commission may provide reasonable input on the content of the training but shall do so no later than ten days prior to the training. 8. Damping will submit a report to the EEOC detailing compliance with this Decree within 180 days of the date of the Decree. Damping will certify to the EEOC’s Regional Attorney that it has complied with ¶¶s 4 - 6 of this Decree. In addition, Damping shall provide the following information:
i. the dates and topics of all training programs presented pursuant to ¶ 7; ii. a copy of all written materials relied on or disseminated at the training programs; iii. the name and position of each employee who attended the training programs; and iv. for the preceding twelve months, a description of all verbal or written complaints
of discrimination by Damping or any of its managers or supervisors from any employee, the name and position of the complainant, Damping’s findings regarding the complaint, and Damping’s response to the complaint including any discipline administered as a result of the complaint. All reports shall be sent to the attention of Laurie A. Young, Regional Attorney, or her successor, Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, 101 West Ohio Street, Suite 1900, Indianapolis IN 46204-4203. 9. The EEOC may review compliance with this Decree. As part of such review, the EEOC may inspect the premises, interview employees, and examine and copy documents. 10. In the event that the EEOC alleges that a violation of this Decree has occurred, the EEOC shall give notice in writing specifically identifying the alleged violation to Damping. Damping
4

will have ten days in which to investigate and respond to the allegation. If the parties are unable to resolve the allegation(s), the EEOC may petition the Court for relief. 11. The term of this Decree shall be for three years following the date of entry of the Decree. 12. Each party will each bear its own costs. 13. The Court will retain jurisdiction of this cause for 3 years for purposes of monitoring compliance with the Decree and entry of such further orders or modifications as may be necessary or appropriate. SO ORDERED.

Date: May 9, 2005
cc: K. Bird D. Mirkin

/s/ Robert L. Miller, Jr. Chief Judge United States District Court

5

EMPLOYEE
NOTICE
Posted Pursuant to an Agreement Resolving a Charge of Employment Discrimination filed with the
U.S. EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY COMMISSION Indianapolis District Office
This Notice is being distributed and posted by agreement between Damping Technologies, Inc., and the United States Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, resolving Civil Action No. 3:04-CV-612 in the United States District Court for the Northern District of Indiana.
Federal law prohibits discrimination against any employee, former employee, or job applicant because of the individual’s sex, race, color, religion, national origin, disability, or age (over 40).
Federal law also prohibits retaliation of any kind against any person who has opposed any practice made unlawful under federal law or because an individual has filed a charge, testified, assisted, or participated in any manner in an investigation, proceeding, or hearing.
Damping supports and will comply with federal law in all respects and will not take any actions against employees because they have exercised their rights under the law. Damping agrees not to discriminate in employment; will conduct a training program on the requirements of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, the Age Discrimination in Employment Act of 1967, and the Americans with Disabilities Act; and will not retaliate against an individual who files a charge of discrimination.
If you have any complaints of discrimination, you may contact the EEOC at the address or telephone number given below. An employee has the right, and is encouraged to exercise that right, to report allegations of employment discrimination in the workplace. An employee may contact the U. S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission for the purpose of filing a charge of employment discrimination.
Questions concerning this notice may be addressed to:
Equal Employment Opportunity Commission 101 West Ohio Street, Suite 1900 Indianapolis, Indiana 46204-4203 Telephone (317) 226-7212 TTY (317) 226-5162
APPENDIX A

RELEASE In consideration of the payment to me by Damping Technologies, Inc., of $65,000.00, less appropriate taxes and withholdings, and in consideration of the Consent Decree (of which this release is a part) agreed to by the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission and Damping Technologies, Inc. in Civil Action 3:04-CV-612, entered of record in the Northern District of Indiana, I, Mary Steely, hereby fully and forever release and discharge Damping Technologies, Inc., and its successors and assigns, including its present and former directors, officers, and agents, from any claim that was raised in Civil Action 3:04-CV-612. I have read this Release and I execute it voluntarily, without coercion or threat of reprisal.

Dated:

Mary Steely

Subscribed and sworn to before me the undersigned, a Notary Public for

County, State of Indiana, this

day of

, 2005.

Signature of Notary Public

County of Residence: My Commission Expires:

Printed name of Notary Public

APPENDIX B

 
 CM/ECF USDC-INND Version 3.0.3 Live DB - Docket Report

https://ecf.innd.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/DktRpt.pl?205615615906784-L_3...

CASREF, TERMED
U.S. District Court Northern District of Indiana [LIVE] USDC Northern Indiana (South Bend)
CIVIL DOCKET FOR CASE #: 3:04-cv-00612-RLM-CAN

Equal Employment Opportunity Commission v. Damping Technologies Inc Assigned to: Judge Robert L Miller Jr Referred to: Magistrate Judge Christopher A Nuechterlein Cause: 42:2000e Job Discrimination (Employment)

Date Filed: 09/23/2004 Date Terminated: 05/09/2005 Jury Demand: Plaintiff Nature of Suit: 442 Civil Rights: Jobs Jurisdiction: U.S. Government Plaintiff

Mediator Joseph V Simeri

Plaintiff
Equal Employment Opportunity Commission

represented by Kenneth L Bird Equal Employment Opportunity Commission - Ind/IN 101 W Ohio Street Suite 1900 Indianapolis, IN 46204-4203 317-226-7204 Fax: 317-226-5571 Email: Kenneth.Bird@EEOC.gov LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

Laurie A Young Equal Employment Opportunity Commission - Ind/IN 101 W Ohio Street Suite 1900 Indianapolis, IN 46204-4203 317-226-7947 Fax: 317-226-7203 Email: legal.station@eeoc.gov LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

Michelle F Eisele Equal Employment Opportunity Commission - Ind/IN 101 W Ohio Street Suite 1900 Indianapolis, IN 46204-4203 317-226-7059 Fax: 317-226-5571 Email: michelle.eisele@eeoc.gov LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

1 of 4

5/17/2007 10:41 AM

CM/ECF USDC-INND Version 3.0.3 Live DB - Docket Report

https://ecf.innd.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/DktRpt.pl?205615615906784-L_3...

V. Defendant Damping Technologies Inc

represented by David L Mirkin Mirkin Law Offices PC 112 W Jefferson Blvd Suite 400 South Bend, IN 46601 574-232-3393 Fax: 574-232-7730 Email: dlmirkin@netscape.net LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

Date Filed 09/23/2004
09/23/2004 09/23/2004 09/23/2004 09/24/2004 10/15/2004 10/15/2004 10/15/2004
10/19/2004
10/27/2004
10/27/2004

#

Docket Text

1 COMPLAINT with Jury Demand against Damping Technologies Inc , filed by Equal Employment Opportunity Commission. (Attachments: # 1 Civil Cover Sheet)(ksc, ) (Entered: 09/24/2004)
2 NOTICE of Appearance by Kenneth L Bird on behalf of Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (ksc, ) (Entered: 09/24/2004)
3 NOTICE of Appearance by Laurie A Young on behalf of Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (ksc, ) (Entered: 09/24/2004)
4 NOTICE of Appearance by Michelle F Eisele on behalf of Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (ksc, ) (Entered: 09/24/2004)
5 Summons Issued as to Damping Technologies Inc. (ksc, ) (Entered: 09/24/2004)
6 NOTICE of Appearance by David L Mirkin on behalf of Damping Technologies Inc (ksc) (Entered: 10/18/2004)
7 DISCLOSURE STATEMENT filed by Damping Technologies Inc.(ksc ) (Entered: 10/18/2004)
8 AGREED NOTICE of Initial Extension of Time To Respond to 1 Complaint filed by Damping Technologies Inc. Defendant's Answer due 11/12/2004. (ksc) (Entered: 10/18/2004)
9 SUMMONS Returned Executed by Equal Employment Opportunity Commission. Damping Technologies Inc served on 9/29/2004, answer due 11/12/2004. (Bird, Kenneth) (Entered: 10/19/2004)
10 NOTICE OF PRETRIAL CONFERENCE: Joint Proposed Discovery Plan due by 12/6/2004. Rule 16 Preliminary Pretrial Conference set for 12/16/2004 at 11:00 AM in South Bend before Magistrate Judge Christopher A Nuechterlein. Signed by Judge Christopher A Nuechterlein on 10/27/04. (ksc) (Entered: 10/28/2004)
11 MAGISTRATE CONSENT FORMS sent to all parties (Standard Track). (ksc) (Entered: 10/28/2004)

2 of 4

5/17/2007 10:41 AM

CM/ECF USDC-INND Version 3.0.3 Live DB - Docket Report

https://ecf.innd.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/DktRpt.pl?205615615906784-L_3...

11/01/2004 11/02/2004 11/12/2004 11/12/2004 12/03/2004 12/06/2004 12/06/2004 12/16/2004
01/05/2005 04/07/2005 04/07/2005
05/03/2005 05/09/2005

12 MOTION to Allow Counsel to Participate in Pretrial Conference by Telephone by Plaintiff Equal Employment Opportunity Commission. (Bird, Kenneth) (Entered: 11/01/2004)
13 ORDER granting 12 MOTION to Allow Counsel to Participate in Pretrial Conference by Telephone. Motions terminated: 12. The Court will allow ALL counsel to participate by telephone. The Court will call all counsel. Signed by Judge Christopher A Nuechterlein on 11/2/04. (ksc) (Entered: 11/03/2004)
14 ANSWER to 1 Complaint by Damping Technologies Inc.(Mirkin, David) (Entered: 11/12/2004)
15 REPORT of Rule 26(f) Planning Meeting. (Bird, Kenneth) (Entered: 11/12/2004)
16 Endorsed MOTION to Amend/Correct Complaint by Plaintiff Equal Employment Opportunity Commission. (Attachments: # 1 Amended Complaint)(Bird, Kenneth) (Entered: 12/03/2004)
17 ORDER granting 16 Motion to Amend Complaint. Defendant need not file an answer to the Amended Complaint . Signed by Judge Christopher A Nuechterlein on 12/6/04. (ksc) (Entered: 12/06/2004)
18 AMENDED COMPLAINT against Damping Technologies Inc, filed by Equal Employment Opportunity Commission.(ksc) (Entered: 12/06/2004)
19 RULE 16 PRELIMINARY PRETRIAL CONFERENCE held on 12/16/2004 before Judge Christopher A Nuechterlein :Pltf to submit ADR Report 1/14/2005. Any amendments to the pleadings to be filed by 12/31/2004. Plaintiff expert witness disclosures and reports to be delivered to the defendant by 5/6/2005. Defendant expert witness disclosures and reports to be delivered to the plainitff by 6/6/2005. All discovery to be completed by 8/1/2005. Summary Judgment Packet to be filed by 9/1/2005. Telephonic Scheduling Conference set for 7/14/2005 10:00 AM in South Bend before Magistrate Judge Christopher A Nuechterlein. (slm, ) Additional attachment(s) added on 12/20/2004 (slm, ). Additional attachment(s) added on 12/20/2004 (slm, ). (Entered: 12/17/2004)
20 REPORT by Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, Damping Technologies Inc Regarding Alternate Dispute Resolution. (Bird, Kenneth) (Entered: 01/05/2005)
21 REPORT of Mediation. The parties have settled. (jld) (Entered: 04/08/2005)
22 ORDER. Based upon representation of the mediator that this case has settled, the Court VACATES the telephonic scheduling conference on 7/11/05 before Magistrate Judge Christopher A Nuechterlein and any other scheduling deadlines previously set. Dismissal Papers due by 5/7/2005. Signed by Judge Robert L Miller Jr on 4/7/05. (jld) (Entered: 04/08/2005)
23 Joint MOTION for Entry of Consent Decree by Plaintiff Equal Employment Opportunity Commission. (Bird, Kenneth) With attached Consent Decree. Text Modified on 5/9/2005 (jld ). (Entered: 05/03/2005)
24 CONSENT DECREE resolving all matters and claims in controversy in this lawsuit as provided in paragraphs 1 through 13. Damping Technologies to pay the total sum of $65,000.00 to Mary Steely as directed. Each party to bear its own

3 of 4

5/17/2007 10:41 AM

CM/ECF USDC-INND Version 3.0.3 Live DB - Docket Report

https://ecf.innd.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/DktRpt.pl?205615615906784-L_3...

05/10/2005

costs. Signed by Judge Robert L Miller Jr on 5/9/05. (ksc) (Entered: 05/09/2005)
25 CLERK'S ENTRY OF JUDGMENT against Damping Technologies Inc. in the amount of 65,000.00. (ksc) Additional attachment(s) added on 5/10/2005 (ksc, ). (Entered: 05/10/2005)

PACER Service Center

Transaction Receipt

PACER Login:
Description:
Billable Pages:

05/17/2007 11:43:14

hs0328

Client Code:

eeoc

Docket Report

Search Criteria:

3:04-cv-00612-RLM-CAN

2

Cost:

0.16

4 of 4

5/17/2007 10:41 AM