IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF FLORIDA
TAMPA DIVISION

EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY COMMISSION,
Plaintiff,
v.
SATURN OF ST. PETERSBURG, INC. and LOKEY AUTOMOTIVE GROUP, INC.
Defendants.

)

)

)

)

)

CIVIL ACTION NO.

)

)

)

COMPLAINT

)

JURY TRIAL DEMANDED

)

INJUNCTIVE RELIEF SOUGHT

)

)

)

NATURE OF THE ACTION

This is an action under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and Title I of the Civil

Rights Act of 1991 to correct unlawful employment practices on the basis of race, and to provide

appropriate relief to Lafayette McClendon, Nakita Knight and Damon Pitts who were adversely

affected by such practices. As stated with greater particularity in paragraph 9 below, the

Commission alleges that Defendants Saturn of St. Petersburg, Inc. and Lokey Automotive Group,

Inc. retaliated against Mr. McClendon, Mr. Knight and Mr. Pitts for filing charges of race

discrimination against Defendants when Defendants interfered with their employment relationships

with their current employer by directing the employer to discharge them for filing those charges.

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. § 2000e-5(f)(1) and (3) ("Title

VII"), and Section 102 of the Civil Rights Act of 1991, 42 U.S.C. § 1981A. 2. The employment practices alleged to be unlawful were committed within the
jurisdiction of the United States District Court for the Middle District of Florida, Tampa 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, 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).
4. At all relevant times, Saturn of St. Petersburg, Inc. (“Saturn”) has continuously been doing business in the State of Florida and the City of Pinellas Park, and has continuously had at least 15 employees.
5. At all relevant times Saturn 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).
6. At all relevant times Lokey Automotive Group, Inc. (“Lokey Automotive”) has continuously been doing business in the State of Florida and the City of Pinellas Park, and has continuously had at least 15 employees.
7. At all relevant times Lokey Automotive 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).
STATEMENT OF CLAIMS 8. More than thirty days prior to the institution of this lawsuit, Mr. McClendon, Mr.
2

Knight and Mr. Pitts filed charges with the Commission alleging violations of Title VII by Defendants. All conditions precedent to the institution of this lawsuit have been fulfilled.
9. Since at least January of 2005, Defendants Saturn and Lokey Automotive (collectively “Defendants”) engaged in unlawful employment practices at their Pinellas Park, Florida location in violation of Section 704(a) of Title VII, 42 U.S.C. §2000e-3(a).
a. Lokey Automotive operates several car dealerships throughout the State of Florida, including Saturn of St. Pete in Pinellas Park, Florida.
b. During the relevant time frame, D&D Detail King, Inc. (“D&D Detail”) had a contract with Defendants to provide car detailing services at Saturn.
c. On or about October 4, 2004, while working as a car detailer for D&D Detail on Defendants’ premises, Mr. McClendon applied for a lot attendant position with Saturn.
d. Mr. McClendon was not hired by Defendants. e. On January 11, 2005, Mr. McClendon filed a charge with EEOC alleging that Defendants discriminated against him on the basis of his race, Black, when they failed to hire him for a lot attendant position. f. On or about October 27, 2004, while working as car detailer for D&D Detail on Defendants’ premises, Mr. Knight applied for a job as a lot attendant with Saturn. g. Mr. Knight was not hired by Defendants. h. On January 11, 2005, Mr. Knight filed a charge with EEOC alleging that Defendants discriminated against him on the basis of his race, Black, when they failed to hire him for a lot attendant position. i. On or about December 29, 2004, while working as General Manager for D&D
3

Detail on Defendants’ premises Mr. Pitts applied for a job as a car salesman with Saturn. j. Mr. Pitts was not hired by Defendants. k. On January 11, 2005, Mr. Pitts filed a charge with EEOC alleging that
Defendants discriminated against him on the basis of his race, Black, for failing to hire him as a car salesman.
l. On or about January 26, 2005, approximately fifteen (15) days after the charges of discrimination were filed with the Commission against Defendants, Defendants directed D&D Detail to discharge Mr. McClendon, Mr. Knight and Mr. Pitts.
m. Scott Harlib, General Manager of Saturn, instructed one of the owners of D&D Detail to get those three employees off his property immediately because they are “suing” the company.
n. The co-owner directed one of his managers to tell Mr. McClendon, Mr. Knight and Mr. Pitts that they must leave the premises.
o. Mr. McClendon, Mr. Knight and Mr. Pitts left Defendants’ premises. p. Mr. Pitts consulted with the D&D Detail owner to determine whether they were really discharged. q. D&D Detail owner confirmed he had no other option than to discharge them from that job due to Mr. Harlib’s direction. r. D&D Detail owner offered Mr. Pitts a job in Ocala and Mr. Knight and Mr. McClendon jobs in Orlando at another D&D Detail client location. Neither Mr. McClendon, Mr. Knight or Mr. Pitts were in a position to accept jobs in other cities as they resided locally. s. Thus, Defendants interfered with Mr. McClendon, Mr. Knight and Mr. Pitts’s
4

employment relationship with their current employer and caused their discharge. 10. The effect of the conduct complained of in paragraph 9 above has been to deprive Mr.
McClendon, Mr. Knight and Mr. Pitts of equal employment opportunities and otherwise adversely affect their status as employees in retaliation for participating in protected activity.
11. The unlawful employment practices complained of in paragraph 9 above were intentional.
12. The unlawful employment practices complained of in paragraph 9 above were done with malice or with reckless indifference to the federally protected rights of Mr. McClendon, Mr. Knight and Mr. Pitts.
PRAYER FOR RELIEF Wherefore, the Commission respectfully requests that this Court: A. Grant a permanent injunction enjoining Defendants, their officers, successors, assigns, and all persons in active concert or participation with them, from engaging in retaliation including third party interference with employment relationships, and any other employment practice which discriminates on the basis of race. B. Order Defendants to institute and carry out policies, practices, and programs which eradicate the effects of their past unlawful employment practices. C. Order Defendants to make whole Mr. McClendon, Mr. Knight and Mr. Pitts by providing appropriate back pay with prejudgment interest, in amounts to be determined at trial, and other affirmative relief necessary to eradicate the effects of their unlawful employment practices, including but not limited to front pay. D. Order Defendants to make whole Mr. McClendon, Mr. Knight and Mr. Pitts by
5

providing compensation for past and future pecuniary losses resulting from the unlawful employment practices described in paragraph 9 above, including out of pocket losses in amounts to be determined at trial.
E. Order Defendants to make whole Mr. McClendon, Mr. Knight and Mr. Pitts by providing compensation for past and future nonpecuniary losses resulting from the unlawful practices complained of in paragraph 9 above, including emotional pain, suffering, inconvenience, humiliation, and loss of enjoyment of life, in amounts to be determined at trial.
F. Order Defendants to pay Mr. McClendon, Mr. Knight and Mr. Pitts punitive damages for their 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, RONALD S. COOPER General Counsel JAMES L. LEE Deputy General Counsel GWENDOLYN YOUNG REAMS Associate General Counsel
6

NORA E. CURTIN Regional Attorney s/Carla J. Von Greiff CARLA J. VON GREIFF Senior Trial Attorney Florida Bar No. 0110566 EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY COMMISSION 501 East Polk Street Suite 1000 Tampa, Florida 33602 Tel. (813) 228-2020 Fax (813) 228-2045 Carla.vongreiff@eeoc.gov
7

 
 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF FLORIDA
TAMPA DIVISION

EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY

)

COMMISSION,

)

)

Plaintiff,

)

)

v.

)

)

SATURN OF ST. PETERSBURG, INC. and

)

LOKEY AUTOMOTIVE GROUP, INC.

)

)

Defendants.

)

)

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

CONSENT DECREE

CIVIL ACTION NO. 8:07-cv-00546-SDM-MSS

1. This Consent Decree ("Decree") is made and entered into by and between

Plaintiff, the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (hereinafter "Commission" or "EEOC"), and Defendants Saturn of St. Petersburg, Inc. and Lokey Automotive Group, Inc. ("Defendants"). The Commission and Defendants are collectively referred to herein as "the

Parties." 2.

On March 30, 2007, EEOC initiated this action by filing its Complaint based upon

charges filed by Lafayette McClendon (EEOC Charge: 151-2005-03442); Damon J. Pitts

(EEOC Charge: 151-2005-00897); and Nakita J. Knight (EEOC Charge: 151-2005-00893).

EEOC's Complaint alleges that Defendants violated Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, as

amended, when they retaliated against Mr. McClendon, Mr. Pitts and Mr. Knight for filing

charges of race discrimination against them by directing their current employer to fire them for

having filed those charges. Specifically, EEOC alleges that Defendants' General Manager, upon

learning that EEOC charges had been filed against the Defendants, instructed one of the owners

of D&D Detail to get those three employees off his property immediately because they are "suing" the company.
3. In the interest of resolving this matter, to avoid the costs of litigation, and as a result of having engaged in comprehensive settlement negotiations, the Parties have agreed that this action should be finally resolved by entry of this Decree. This Decree is final and binding upon the Parties, their successors and assigns.
4. Neither this Consent Decree nor anything contained herein shall constitute or is to be construed as an admission by the Defendants as evidence of any liability, wrongdoing, or unlawful conduct.
5. The Parties agree that this Decree resolves all claims alleged against the Defendants in EEOC Charge Numbers 151-2005-03442, 151-2005-00897, 151-2005-00893 and the Complaint filed in this action, and constitutes a complete resolution of all claims under Title VII that were made by the Commission in this action. This Decree has no effect on any other pending or future charges against Defendants.
6. NOW, THEREFORE, the Court having carefully examined the terms and provisions of this Decree, and based on the pleadings filed by the parties, it is ORDERED, ADJUDGED AND DECREED THAT:
JURISDICTION 7. This Court has jurisdiction of the subject matter of this action and over the Parties for the purposes of entering and enforcing this Decree. 8. No party shall contest jurisdiction of this federal court to enforce this Decree and its terms or the right of the EEOC to seek enforcement in the event Defendants breach any of the
2

terms of this Decree. DISCRIMINATION POLICY AND TRAINING
9. Defendants will establish a written policy prohibiting unlawful retaliation in the workplace. Defendants agree that all of their employees and managers will be provided a complete copy of their policy prohibiting retaliation within thirty (30) days of the entry of this Decree. Defendants also agree that all new employees shall be given a copy of the policy against retaliation within their first week of employment with the Defendants.
10. In order to further ensure the effective implementation of Defendants' antiretaliation policy, in addition to the anti-discrimination training already conducted, Defendants will conduct six (6) hours of training annually for all of their managers with specific emphasis on the prohibition of retaliation for engaging in protected activity under Title VII. Defendants agree to provide the EEOC, at least two weeks notice before they conduct their training session(s), with the date(s) and location(s) of the training, the identification of the training materials to be used at the training session, and a general description of the category of employees who will be in attendance at the training. The training will be conducted quarterly in one and one half hour increments by Chuck Sullivan, Esquire, and/or the law firm of McFarland, Gould, Lyons, Sullivan & Hogan, P.A., and/or the law firm of Fisher Phillips, LLP, and/or a law firm of Defendants' choice that is acceptable to EEOC. Additionally, Defendants agree that the EEOC, at the EEOC's discretion, may be in attendance at each training session(s).
11. Defendants agree that the training described in paragraph 10 shall be commenced within thirty (30) days of the entry of this Decree. And, shall take place quarterly thereafter in the same format, for the duration of this Decree. Defendants further agree that the policy and
3

training materials utilized for the training described in paragraph 10 shall be presented to and explained to all new managers and supervisors who did not attend the quarterly training, within thirty (30) days of being placed in a management or supervisory position.
DISCIPLINE TO OFFENDING EMPLOYEE 12. Defendants agree to issue a written warning to the General Manager of the Dealership for a violation of the Company's no retaliation policy that within fifteen (15) calendar days of the entry of this Decree. The written warning will be placed in the employee's personnel file. Defendants further agree that they will provide the EEOC with a copy of the written warning once it has been issued to the offending employee.
POSTING 13. Defendants will post a laminated 11 x 14 copy of the Notice, attached as Exhibit A, no later than April 15, 2008. The notice shall be posted at Defendants' Saturn of St. Petersburg location for the duration of this Decree in a conspicuous location accessible to all employees such as an employee bulletin board and/or break/lunch room.
MONITORING 14. Defendants will retain all employment and/or investigative records relating in any way to any complaint or allegation of retaliation for the duration of this Decree and as required under federal law. 15. Defendants will certify to the EEOC every 180 days throughout the duration of this Decree that they are in compliance with all aspects of this Decree. The first such certification will be due no later than 180 days from the date of execution of the Decree. With each certification Defendants will further provide the EEOC with the name, address, and phone
4

number of any person who alleges they have been retaliated against while working for Defendants during the preceding six month period. Defendants will also state the actions taken in response to each such allegation and provide any and all documentation associated with such complaint. The certifications required to be submitted to the EEOC pursuant to this Consent Decree shall be mailed with the notation SATURN OF ST. PETERSBURG to: United States Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, Attention: Office of the Regional Attorney, One Biscayne Tower, Suite 2700, 2 South Biscayne Boulevard, Miami, FI 33131.
MONETARY RELIEF 16. Defendants agree to pay a total amount of $75,000.00 (Seventy five thousand dollars) to resolve this litigation. The payments referenced herein shall issue within fifteen (15) calendar days of the Court's execution of the Decree and be distributed as set forth in Exhibit B attached hereto. 17. If Defendants fail to tender the above-mentioned payment as set forth in paragraph 16 and Exhibit B, Defendants shall pay interest on the defaulted payment at the rate calculated pursuant to 26 U.S.C. Section 6621(b) until the same is paid, and bear any additional costs incurred by the EEOC caused by the non-compliance or delay of the Defendants.
ENFORCEMENT OF DECREE 18. The Commission shall have independent authority to seek the judicial enforcement of any aspect, term or provision of this Decree.
COSTS AND FEES 19. Each Party shall bear its own costs and attorneys' fees associated with this litigation.
5

DURATION OF CONSENT DECREE

20. The duration of this Decree shall be three (3) years from the date of entry of the

Decree.

SO ORDERED, ADJUDGED AND DECREED, this _ day of March, 2008.

STEVEN D. MERRYDAY UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

6

AGREED TO: FOR THE PLAINTIFF, UNITED STATES EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY COMMISSION

by: s/ Nora E. Curtin

Date: March 11,2008

Nora E. Curtin

Regional Attorney U.S. EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY COMMISSION

Miami District Office

One Biscayne Tower, Suite 2700

2 South Biscayne Boulevard

Miami, Florida 33131

Telephone: (305) 530-6001

Facsimile: (305) 536-4494

Email: nora.curtin@eeoc.gov

AGREED TO: FOR THE DEFENDANTS, SATURN OF ST. PETERSBURG, INC. and LOKEY AUTOMOTIVE GROUP, INC.

by: s/ Barbra A. Stem

Date: March 11,2008

Barbra A. Stem

Florida Bar No. 526576

Law Offices of Bohdan Neswiacheny

540 N.E. 4th St.

Ft. Lauderdale, FL 33301

Phone: (954) 522-5400

Facsimile: (954) 765-1274

Email: bstern@bnlaw.com

, President Lokey Automotive Group/Saturn of St. Petersburg
7

EXHIBIT A NOTICE TO ALL EMPLOYEES POSTED PURSUANT TO A CONSENT DECREE BETWEEN THE UNITED STATES EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY COMMISSION AND SATURN OF ST. PETERSBURG, INC. AND LOKEY AUTOMOTIVE GROUP, INC.
This notice is being posted pursuant to a Consent Decree entered by the Court in u.s.
EEOC v. Saturn ofSt. Petersburg, Inc. and Lokey Automotive Group, Inc., Civil Action 8:07-cv00546-SDM-MSS. In that lawsuit, EEOC alleged that Defendants, upon learning that EEOC charges had been filed against the Defendants, instructed the employer of the persons who filed the charges, to get those three employees off his property immediately causing their discharge. Saturn of St. Petersburg, Inc. and Lokey Automotive Group, Inc. have agreed that they will not discriminate against employees on the basis of race or retaliate against employees who make good faith complaints of discrimination in violation of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 ("Title VIlli). Title VII protects individuals from employment discrimination because of their race, religion, color, national origin, or sex. Saturn of St. Petersburg, Inc. and Lokey Automotive Group, Inc. will not condone employment discrimination of any kind as set forth in federal antidiscrimination laws.
Furthermore, Saturn of St. Petersburg, Inc. and Lokey Automotive Group, Inc. assure their employees that they support Title VII and will not take any action against an individual because he/she has exercised hislher rights under the law to oppose discriminatory acts or to file charges with the EEOC. Appropriate corrective action, up to and including termination, shall be taken against any employee (including management personnel) found to violate the policies regarding discrimination, based upon the circumstances involved.
This notice shall remain posted for three (3) years from the date signed. Employees or applicants for employment who have questions about their rights under Title VII or any other federal anti-discrimination law may telephone the Miami District Office of the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission at 1-800-669-4000.

~ DO NOT REMOVE BEFORE

2011.

8

,· ..
EXHIBITB
MONETARY DISTRIBUTION
The $75,000.00 monetary relief paid to resolve EEOC v. v. Saturn ofSt. Petersburg, Inc. and Lokey Automotive Group, Inc., Civil Action 8:07-cv-00546-SDM-MSS shall be distributed as follows:
(A) Defendants will pay Lafayette McClendon $25,000.00, which shall be representative of compensatory damages and punitive damages and will issue an I.R.S. form 1099 itemizing same.
(B) Defendants will pay Damon Pitts $25,000.00 which shall be representative of compensatory damages and punitive damages and will issue an I.R.S. form 1099 itemizing same.
(C) Defendants will pay Nakita Knight $25,000.00 which shall be representative of compensatory damages and punitive damages and will issue an I.R.S. form 1099 itemizing same.
The payments to Mr. McClendon, Mr. Pitts, and Mr. Knight shall be made by check in their individual name and forwarded by certified mail with a return receipt requested to an address to be provided by the EEOC. A copy of the check(s) shall be forwarded to the attention of Carla Von Greiff, Senior Trial Attorney, U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, 501 East Polk Street, Suite 1000, Tampa, Florida 33611.

 
 CLOSED, TRLSET
U.S. District Court Middle District of Florida (Tampa) CIVIL DOCKET FOR CASE #: 8:07−cv−00546−SDM−MSS

Equal Employment Opportunity Commission v. Saturn of St. Petersburg, Inc. et al Assigned to: Judge Steven D. Merryday Referred to: Magistrate Judge Mary S. Scriven Cause: 42:2000e Job Discrimination (Employment)
Plaintiff

Date Filed: 03/30/2007 Date Terminated: 04/07/2008 Jury Demand: Both Nature of Suit: 442 Civil Rights: Jobs Jurisdiction: U.S. Government Plaintiff

Equal Employment Opportunity Commission

represented by Carla Johanna Von Greiff Equal Employment Opportunity Commission Tampa Area Office 501 E. Polk St., Ste. 1000 Tampa , FL 33602 813/202−7903 Fax: 813/228−2045 Email: carla.vongreiff@eeoc.gov LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

Nora Ellen Curtin EEOC 2 South Biscayne Blvd. Suite 2700 Miami , FL 33131 305/808−1789 Fax: 305/808−1835 Email: nora.curtin@eeoc.gov LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

V. Defendant Saturn of St. Petersburg, Inc.
Defendant Lokey Automotive Group, Inc.
Mediator Mary A. Lau

represented by Barbra A. Stern Law Offices of Bohdan Neswiacheny 540 NE 4th St Ft Lauderdale , FL 33301 954/522−5400 Fax: 954/765−1274 Email: bstern@bnlaw.com ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
represented by Barbra A. Stern (See above for address) ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
represented by Mary A. Lau Lau, Lane, Pieper, Conley &McCreadie, PA Suite 1700 100 S Ashley Dr Tampa , FL 33602 813/229−2121 Fax: 813/228−7710 Email: Mlau@laulane.com

LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

Date Filed 03/30/2007 03/30/2007 04/03/2007 04/16/2007 05/16/2007
05/16/2007 06/15/2007 07/13/2007 08/01/2007
08/13/2007
08/30/2007 10/31/2007 11/07/2007
12/06/2007 12/10/2007 01/04/2008 01/23/2008

# Docket Text
1 COMPLAINT against Saturn of St. Petersburg, Inc., Lokey Automotive Group, Inc. ; Jury Demand filed by Equal Employment Opportunity Commission.(cda) (Entered: 04/02/2007)
2 Summons issued as to Saturn of St. Petersburg, Inc., Lokey Automotive Group, Inc. (cda) (Entered: 04/02/2007)
3 NOTICE of designation under Local Rule 3.05 − track 2. Signed by Deputy Clerk on 4/3/2007. (maa) (Entered: 04/03/2007)
4 NOTICE by Equal Employment Opportunity Commission Of Designation For Receipt Of Service Via CM/ECF System (Von Greiff, Carla) (Entered: 04/16/2007)
5 WAIVER OF SERVICE returned executed on 5/15/07 by Saturn of St. Petersburg, Inc., Lokey Automotive Group, Inc.. Waiver of Service sent on 4/16/07 as to Saturn of St. Petersburg, Inc., Lokey Automotive Group, Inc. (Stern, Barbra) (Entered: 05/16/2007)
6 NOTICE of Appearance by Barbra A. Stern on behalf of Saturn of St. Petersburg, Inc., Lokey Automotive Group, Inc. (Stern, Barbra) (Entered: 05/16/2007)
7 ANSWER and affirmative defenses to complaint with Jury Demand by Saturn of St. Petersburg, Inc., Lokey Automotive Group, Inc..(Stern, Barbra) (Entered: 06/15/2007)
8 CASE MANAGEMENT REPORT. (Von Greiff, Carla) (Entered: 07/13/2007)
9 CASE MANAGEMENT AND SCHEDULING ORDER: Joinder of Parties due by 9/28/2007, Discovery due by 2/29/2008, Dispositive motions due by 4/1/2008, Final Pretrial Conference set for 8/7/2008 at 09:30 AM in Courtroom 10 A before Magistrate Judge Mary S. Scriven, Jury Trial set for trial term commencing 9/2/2008 at 01:30 PM in Courtroom 15 A before Judge Steven D. Merryday. Signed by Judge Steven D. Merryday on 8/1/2007. (maa) (Entered: 08/01/2007)
10 ORDER REFERRING CASE to mediation before Mary A. Lau, Mediator. Lead counsel Carla Von Greiff to coordinate dates and file a notice of mediation within twenty days. Mediation shall be conducted on or before 01/29/2008. Signed by Judge Steven D. Merryday on 8/13/2007. (Attachments: # 1 mediation attachment/report)(maa) (Entered: 08/13/2007)
11 NOTICE of mediation to be held on December 7, 2007, 10:00 A.M. before Mary A. Lau. (Von Greiff, Carla) (Entered: 08/30/2007)
12 MOTION to extend time to file discovery responses until November 7, 2007 by all defendants. (Stern, Barbra) (Entered: 10/31/2007)
13 ORDER granting 12 Defendants' Motion for Enlargement of Time to Respond to Plaintiff's Interrogatories and Request for Production. Defendants shall have up to and including November 7, 2007, to provide their responses to Plaintiff. Signed by Judge Mary S. Scriven on 11/7/2007. (mst) (Entered: 11/07/2007)
14 Unopposed MOTION to extend time to complete mediation by Saturn of St. Petersburg, Inc., Lokey Automotive Group, Inc.. (Stern, Barbra) (Entered: 12/06/2007)
15 ORDER granting 14 −−motion to extend to 1/15/2008 the time within which to mediate. Notice of mediation due 12/17/2007. Signed by Judge Steven D. Merryday on 12/10/2007. (BK) (Entered: 12/10/2007)
16 NOTICE of mediation to be held on January 15, 2008 10:00 a.m. before Mary Lau. (Stern, Barbra) (Entered: 01/04/2008)
17 MEDIATION REPORT Hearing held on JANUARY 15, 2008. Hearing outcome: Recessed for 90 days.(Lau, Mary) (Entered: 01/23/2008)

02/22/2008 02/27/2008
03/26/2008 04/07/2008

18 Unopposed MOTION for Extension of Time to Complete Discovery by Saturn of St. Petersburg, Inc., Lokey Automotive Group, Inc.. (Stern, Barbra) Motions referred to Magistrate Judge Mary S. Scriven. (Entered: 02/22/2008)
19 ORDER granting 18 Defendants' Unopposed Motion for Extension of Time to Complete Discovery. The parties shall have up to and including March 12, 2008, to depose the single witness disclosed in Defendants' Motion. Except for the above modification, no further discovery shall be had during the extended time period, and all other deadlines set forth in the Court's Case Management and Scheduling Order 9 shall remain in effect. Signed by Magistrate Judge Mary S. Scriven on 2/27/2008. (MST) (Entered: 02/27/2008)
20 Joint MOTION For Approval of Consent Decree by Equal Employment Opportunity Commission. (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit Consent Decree)(Von Greiff, Carla) (Entered: 03/26/2008)
21 ORDER granting 20 −−motion for entry of consent decree; adopting terms of proposed consent decree (attached); declining to retain jurisdiction except to the extent necessary to enforce the consent judgment; the Clerk shall TERMINATE any pending motion and CLOSE the case. Signed by Judge Steven D. Merryday on 4/7/2008. (Attachments: # 1 CONSENT DECREE) (BK) (Entered: 04/07/2008)