Case 5:06-cv-06140-RS Document 1 Filed 09/29/2006 Page 1 of 5

,

"

FI L WILLIAM R. TAMAYO (CA Bar No. 084965) NB' 1 JONATHAN T. PECK, Supervisory Trial Attorney (VA Bar

12303)

2 ~lf~l~~;l~\~~JTtr~6~,¥J~hY COMMISSION 6ScP 29 PH

San Francisco District Office 3 350 The Embarcadero, Suite 500
San Francisco, CA 94105
4 Telephone No. (415) 625-5653

N;U;l RE'"lfCfkli,"/i

S'il i; h' '" QlsTiH

I

'I"'el 0/ c. [

Facsimile No. (415) 625-5657 5

Attorneys for Plaintiff Equal Employment Opportunity Commission
6

7

8

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

9

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

, ~Cas;N6 6 'T'~" 6140 10

11

EQUAL EMPLOYMENT ,
OPPORTUNITY COMMISSION,

I ~ COMP}!INT

-

12

Plaintiff,

) Civil Rights-Employment Discrimination

13

v.

~ DEMAND FOR JURY TRIAL

14 HAMMON PLATING CORPORATION, ~

15

Defendant.

~

16

17

NATURE OF THE ACTION

18

This action is brought pursuant to Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and Title I of

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

20 origin and retaliation, and to provide appropriate relief to Teresa Aguilar, Luz Esparza, and Julio

21 Villa, and similarly situated employees who were adversely affected by such practices.

22 Defendant Hammon Plating Corporation subjected Ms. Aguilar and Ms. Esparza, and similarly

23 situated employees to unlawful sexual harassment. In addition, Defendant subjected Ms.

24 Aguilar, Ms. Esparza, Mr. Villa, and similarly situated employees to unlawful discriminatory

25 harassment based on their national origin, Mexican.

26

JURISDICTION AND VENUE

27

1) Jurisdiction of this Court is invoked pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §§451, 1331, 1337,

28 1343 and 1345. This action is authorized and instituted pursuant to §706(t)(1) and (3) of Title

COMPLAINT

Page 1

Case 5:06-cv-06140-RS Document 1 Filed 09/29/2006 Page 2 of 5

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

2 and §102 of the Civil Rights Act of 1991,42 U.S.C. §198la.

3

2) The unlawful employment practices alleged herein were and are now being

4 committed within the jurisdiction ofthe United States District Court for the Northern District of

5 California.

6

INTRADISTRICT ASSIGNMENT

7

3) This action is appropriate for assignment to San Jose because the unlawful

8 employment practices alleged were and are being committed in Santa Clara County, the

9 employment records relevant to the unlawful practices were and are located in Santa Clara

10 County, and Defendant's principal place of business is in Santa Clara County.

11

PARTIES

12

4) Plaintiff, the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission ("Commission") is the

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

14 enforcement of Title VII, and is expressly authorized to bring this action by §§706(f)(1) and (3)

15 ofTitle VII, §§2000-e(f)(1) and (3).

16

5) DefendantHammon Plating Corporation ("Defendant") is a California

17 corporation, doing business in the State of California, in the County of Santa Clara, and has

18 continuously had at least 15 employees.

19

6) At all relevant times, Defendant Hammon Plating Corporation has continuously

20 been an employer engaged in an industry affecting commerce, within the meaning of Section

21 701(b), (g) and (h) ofTitle VII, 42 U.S.C. §§2000-e(b), (g) and (h).

22

STATEMENT OF CLAIMS

23

FIRST CLAIM FOR RELIEF

24

On Behalf of Charging Parties Aguilar and Esparza and Similarly Situated Employees

25

Violation of Title VII of Civil Rights Act Based on Sexual Harassment

26

7) More than thirty days prior to the institution of this lawsuit, Teresa Aguilar, Luz

27 Esparza and Julio Villa filed charges of discrimination with Plaintiff Commission alleging

28 violations of Title VII by Defendant. All conditions precedent to the institution of this lawsuit

COMPLAINT

Page

Case 5:06-cv-06140-RS Document 1 Filed 09/29/2006 Page 3 of 5

I have been fulfilled.

2

8) Since at least August 29, 2004, Defendant engaged in unlawful employment

3 practices in violation of §704(a) of Title VII, 42 U.S.c. §2000-e-3(a) by subjecting Charging

4 Parties Aguilar and Esparza, and similarly situated employees, to a sexually hostile, abusive,

5 intimidating and offensive work environment. This hostile environment was created by

6 unwelcome verbal and physical harassment of a sexual nature and based on sex, and resulted in

7 the constructive discharge of Charging Parties Aguilar and Esparza, and similarly situated

8 employees.

9

9) The effect of the actions complained of in paragraph 8 above has been to deprive

10 Charging Parties Aguilar and Esparza, and similarly situated employees of equal employment

II opportunities and otherwise adversely affect their status as employees.

12

10) The unlawful employment practice complained of in paragraph 8 above were

13 intentional.

14

11) The unlawful employment practice complained of in paragraph 8 above were

IS done with malice and/or with reckless indifference to the federally protected rights of Charging

16 Parties Aguilar and Esparza, and similarly situated employees.

17

SECOND CLAIM FOR RELIEF

18

On Behalf of Charging Parties Agnilar, Esparza and Villa, and Similarly Situated

19

Employees

Violation of Title VII of Civil Rights Act Based on National Origin-Based Harassment 20
12) Plaintiff Commission hereby incorporates the allegations of paragraphs 1 through

21 7 above as though fully set forth herein.

22
13) In addition to the above-referenced disparate treatment, Defendant engaged in

23 unlawful employment practices in violation of §704(a) of Title VII, 42 U.S.C. §2000-e-3(a) by

24 subjecting Charging Parties Aguilar, Esparza, and Villa, and similarly situated employees, to a

25 hostile, abusive, intimidating and offensive work environment on the basis oftheir national

26
origin, Mexican. This hostile environment was created by unwelcome derogatory comments and

27 degrading actions based on the employees' national origin, and resulted in the constructive

28 discharge of Charging Parties Aguilar, Esparza, Villa, and similarly situated employees.

COMPLAINT

Page 3

Case 5:06-cv-06140-RS Document 1 Filed 09/29/2006 Page 4 of 5

1

14) The effect of the actions complained of in paragraph 13 above has been to deprive

2 Charging Parties and similarly situated employees of equal employment opportunities and

3 otherwise adversely affect their status as employees because of their national origin.

4

15) The unlawful employment practice complained of in paragraph 13 above was

5 intentional.

6

16) The unlawful employment practice complained of in paragraph 13 above was

7 done with malice or with reckless indifference to the federally protected rights of Charging

8 Parties and similarly situated employees.

9

PRAYER FOR RELIEF

10

Wherefore, the Commission respectfully requests that this Court:

11

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

12 assigns, and all persons acting in concert or participation with them, from engaging in sex

13 discrimination, including sexual harassment, against its employees.

14

B. Grant a permanent injunction enjoining Defendant, its officers, successors,

15 assigns, and all persons acting in concert or participation with them, from engaging in national

16 origin discrimination, including harassment based on national origin, against its employees.

17

C. Order Defendant to institute and carry out policies, practices, and programs which

18 prohibit disparate treatment based on sex and national origin, and which eradicate the effects of

19 its unlawful employment practices.

20

D. Order Defendant to make Charging Parties and similarly situated employees

21 whole, by providing appropriate back pay and benefits with prejudgment interest, and other

22 affirmative relief necessary to eradicate the effects of their unlawful employment practices,

23 including but not limited to reinstatement and/or front pay and other appropriate reliefto be

24 determined at trial.

25

E. Order Defendant to make Charging Parties and similarly situated employees

26 whole by providing compensation for past and future pecuniary losses resulting from the

27 unlawful employment practices complained of above, including but not limited to such out-of-

28 pocket expenses as medical care necessitated by Defendant's unlawful conduct, in amounts to be

COMPLAINT

Page

Case 5:06-cv-06140-RS Document 1 Filed 09/29/2006 Page 5 of 5

1 determined at trial.

2

F. Order Defendant to make Charging Parties and similarly situated employees

3 whole by providing compensation for past and future nonpecuniary losses resulting from the

4 unlawful practices complained of above including, but not limited to emotional pain and

5 suffering, inconvenience, loss of enjoyment of life and humiliation, in amounts to be determined

6 at trial.

7

G. Order Defendant to pay Charging Parties and similarly situated employees

8 punitive damages for the malicious and reckless conduct described above, in amounts to be

9 determined at trial.

10

H. Grant such further relief as the Court may deem just and proper in the public

11 interest.

12

1.

Award the Commission its costs of this action.

13

DEMAND FOR JURY TRIAL

14

Pursuant to the provisions of Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 38(b), Plaintiff hereby

15 demands a jury trial.

16

Ronald S. Cooper

General Counsel

17

James L.Lee

Deputy General Counsel

18

Gwendolyn Young Reams

Associate General Counsel

19

Equal Employment Opportunity

Commission

20

1801 L Street, N.W.

Washington, DC 20507

21

22
23

Date: J;t~

,2006

24
25 Date: ~1. 2..(" W
26

,2006

27 Date: --'.S"'-"(?;y..4r.'----d--'--, 2006

28

V

COMPLAINT

Page

 
 Case 5:06-cv-06140-RS Document 18 Filed 01/22/2007 Page 1 of 4

United States District Court For the Northern District of California

1

2

3

*E-FILED 1/22/07*

4

5

6

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

7

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

8

SAN JOSE DIVISION

9

10 EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY 11 COMMISSION,

12

v.

Plaintiff,

13 HAMMON PLATING CORPORATION,

14

15

Defendant. /

16

NO. C 06-06140 RS
ORDER DENYING MOTION TO DISMISS OR STAY

17

I. INTRODUCTION

18

Defendant Hammon Plating Corporation moves to dismiss this action or, in the alternative,

19 for a stay, based on its contention that plaintiff Equal Employment Opportunity Commission

20 (“EEOC”) failed to fulfil its statutory pre-suit obligation to engage in “conciliation” efforts to

21 resolve this matter. As discussed with the parties at the hearing, there does not appear to have been

22 such a complete failure by the EEOC to make conciliation efforts that would justify dismissal of this

23 action, and Hammon’s alternative request for a stay appears to seek relief that could as easily be

24 accommodated through early alternative dispute resolution proceedings in this action. The Court

25 instructed the parties to meet and confer as to a plan for engaging in an alternative dispute resolution

26 process. The parties have reported that they have agreed to submit to mediation pursuant to this

27 District’s ADR program, “in an expeditious manner.” Accordingly, the motion will be denied,

28 except to the extent that Hammon sought, and will obtain, expedited mediation of this dispute.

1

Case 5:06-cv-06140-RS Document 18 Filed 01/22/2007 Page 2 of 4

United States District Court For the Northern District of California

1

II. BACKGROUND

2

Three former Hammon employees filed charges of discrimination with the EEOC against the

3 company. The EEOC concluded there was reasonable cause to believe discrimination had occurred,

4 and so advised the company. Hammon contends that the EEOC thereafter failed to comply with 42

5 U.S.C. section 2000e-5(f)(1), which authorizes the EEOC to bring suit only after first attempting “to

6 secure from the respondent a conciliation agreement acceptable to the Commission.”

7

In opposing this motion, the EEOC applied for, and obtained, an order permitting it to file

8 under seal the evidence it contends shows it made sufficient efforts to obtain a conciliation

9 agreement. The EEOC pointed to section 706 (b) of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, as

10 amended (42 U.S.C. § 2000e-5(b)), which provides, among other things that “[n]othing said or done

11 during and as a part of such informal endeavors [to conciliate] may be made public by the

12 Commission, its officers or employees, or used as evidence in a subsequent proceeding without the

13 written consent of the persons concerned.” In light of the statute, the sealing order, and the fact that

14 at the hearing Hammon pressed for expedited mediation rather than dismissal, this order will not set

15 forth the pre-suit communications between the parties.

16

17

III. DISCUSSION

18

Having reviewed the parties’ evidentiary submissions, the Court is satisfied that the EEOC’s

19 efforts to obtain a conciliation agreement were not so lacking as to justify dismissal of this action.

20 The Court declines to second-guess the judgment of the EEOC with respect to whether a more

21 conciliatory approach would have been more likely to achieve the policy objectives of the statutory

22 scheme or more in keeping with the spirit of the statute. At this juncture, the primary interest of

23 Hammon is that it have the opportunity to mediate this dispute sooner, rather than later. Such a

24 result is equally in the interests of the EEOC, and can be achieved without a formal stay of this

25 action. The parties have agreed to proceed with mediation as expeditiously as practicable.

26 Accordingly, except to the extent explained above, the motion will be denied.

27

28

2

Case 5:06-cv-06140-RS Document 18 Filed 01/22/2007 Page 3 of 4

United States District Court For the Northern District of California

1

IV. CONCLUSION

2

Hammon’s motion to dismiss or for a stay is denied, except insofar as the parties are hereby

3 ordered to engage in mediation under the District’s ADR program as promptly as is practicable.

4

5

IT IS SO ORDERED.

6 Dated: January 22, 2007 7

RICHARD SEEBORG United States Magistrate Judge

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28
ORDER DENYING MOTION TO DISMISS OR STAY C 06-06140 RS
3

Case 5:06-cv-06140-RS Document 18 Filed 01/22/2007 Page 4 of 4

United States District Court For the Northern District of California

1 THIS IS TO CERTIFY THAT NOTICE OF THIS ORDER HAS BEEN GIVEN TO:

2 Christopher E. Cobey ccobey@littler.com, sjoyner@littler.com; nculver@littler.com; rrapoport@bbgslaw.com
3 Elizabeth Esparza-Cervantes Elizabeth.Esparza-Cervantes@eeoc.gov,
4 PATTICKLER.SANFPO.EEOCSANF@EEOC.GOV

5 Cindy O'Hara cindy.ohara@eeoc.gov

6 Jonathan T. Peck Jonathan.Peck@eeoc.gov

7 William Robert Tamayo william.tamayo@eeoc.gov, pat.tickler@eeoc.gov

8

9 Counsel are responsible for distributing copies of this document to co-counsel who have not registered for e-filing under the Court's CM/ECF program.
10

11 Dated: 1/22/07

Chambers of Judge Richard Seeborg

12

By:

/s/ BAK

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28
ORDER DENYING MOTION TO DISMISS OR STAY C 06-06140 RS
4

 
 Case 5:06-cv-06140-RS Document 34 Filed 10/22/2007 Page 1 of 6

1 WILLIAM R. TAMAYO (CA Bar No. 084965)

JONATHAN T. PECK (VA Bar No. 12303)

2 CINDY O’HARA (CA Bar No. 114555)

EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY COMMISSION

3 San Francisco District Office

350 The Embarcadero, Suite 500

4 San Francisco, CA 94105 Telephone No. (415) 625-5653

*E-FILED 10/22/07*

5 Facsimile No. (415) 625-5657

6 Attorneys for Plaintiff Equal Employment Opportunity Commission
7

8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
9 NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
10

11 EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY )

COMMISSION,

)

12

)

)

13

Plaintiff,

)

)

14 v.

)

)

15

)

HAMMON PLATING CORPORATION, )

16

)

Defendant.

)

17 _______________________________________ )

Case No. C-06-06140 RS CONSENT DECREE

18

Plaintiff Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (“Commission”) filed this

19 action under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and Title I of the Civil Rights Act of

20 1991 to correct alleged unlawful employment practices on the basis of discrimination

21 based on sex and national origin, and to provide appropriate relief to Teresa Aguilar,

22 Luz Esparza, and Julio Villa, and similarly situated individuals, whom the Commission

23 alleged were adversely affected by such practices. The Commission alleged that

24 Defendant Hammon Plating Corporation (“Hammon”) subjected Ms. Aguilar and Ms.

25 Esparza and similarly situated women to unlawful harassment based on their sex, in

26 violation of Title VII, and subjected Ms. Aguilar, Ms. Esparza, Mr. Villa and similarly

27 situated individuals of Mexican national origin to harassment based on their national

28 origin. Defendant has vigorously denied the above allegations and claims. The

CONSENT DECREE

Page 1

Case 5:06-cv-06140-RS Document 34 Filed 10/22/2007 Page 2 of 6

1 Commission and Defendant Hammon now seek to resolve this action as to each other

2 and as between Hammon and Teresa Aguilar, Luz Esparza, and Julio Villa (“Charging

3 Parties”) without further contested litigation through the instant Consent Decree. This

4 resolution does not constitute an admission of liability on the part of Hammon, nor

5 constitute a finding on the allegations stated in the Commission’s Complaint.

6

The Court has reviewed this Consent Decree in light of the pleadings, the record

7 herein, and the applicable law, and now approves this Consent Decree.

8

THEREFORE IT IS HEREBY ORDERED, ADJUDGED AND DECREED:

9 GENERAL PROVISIONS

10

1. This Court has jurisdiction over the subject matter and the parties to this

11 action. This Court retains jurisdiction over this Consent Decree during its term.

12

2. This Consent Decree constitutes a full and final resolution of the

13 Commission’s claims against Hammon in this action.

14

3. This Consent Decree will become effective upon its entry by the Court.

15

4. This Consent Decree is final and binding upon the parties to it, their

16 successors and assigns.

17

5. The Commission and Hammon will each bear its own costs and attorneys

18 fees in this action.

19 GENERAL INJUNCTIVE RELIEF

20

6. Hammon and its current officers, agents, employees, and all persons in

21 active concert or participation with them is enjoined from discriminating based on sex

22 and national origin or permitting the existence of a work environment that is hostile to

23 employees based on their sex and national origin, as prohibited under Title VII.

24

7. Hammon and its current officers, agents, employees, and all persons in

25 active concert or participation with them is enjoined from engaging in, implementing or

26 permitting any action, policy or practice which retaliates against Charging Parties, or

27 any other employee or former employee, for having testified or participated in any

28 manner in the Commission’s investigation and the proceedings in this case.

CONSENT DECREE

Page 2

Case 5:06-cv-06140-RS Document 34 Filed 10/22/2007 Page 3 of 6

1 SPECIAL INJUNCTIVE RELIEF

2

Non-Discrimination Policies and Complaint Procedures

3

8. Within thirty (30) days of the entry of this Consent Decree, Hammon will

4 issue a written anti-harassment policy, in English and Spanish. Said policy will

5 incorporate the following policy statement:

6

Hammon Plating Corporation is firmly committed to creating and

maintaining a workplace free of unlawful discriminatory harassment; to

7

swiftly and firmly respond to any acts of harassment of which the

company becomes aware; to implementing a disciplinary system that is

8

designed to strongly deter future acts of unlawful harassment or

retaliation; and to actively monitor its workplace in order to ensure

9

tolerance, respect and dignity for all employees. Hammon encourages its

employees to come forward with complaints of unlawful discrimination or

10

harassment, and will not retaliate against individuals who report

harassment in the workplace.

11

9. In order to accomplish the objectives reflected in the policy statement

12

referenced in Paragraph 8 of this Decree, Hammon will make sure that its written anti-

13

harassment policy (a) includes definitions of discriminatory harassment, with specific

14

reference to harassment based on race; (b) includes examples to supplement the

15

definitions of harassment based on race; (c) provides for substantial discipline and/or

16

corrective action for incidents of discriminatory harassment; (d) includes strong non-

17

retaliation language with examples to supplement the definition of retaliation, (e)

18

provides for substantial discipline for incidents of retaliation; (f) provides that

19

complaints of harassment and/or retaliation will be accepted irrespective of whether

20

they are made verbally or in writing; (g) explains that Defendant will conduct a prompt

21

and thorough investigation after a complaint is made or received and, where

22

appropriate, will take remedial action upon conclusion of an investigation; and (h)

23

indicates that, promptly upon the conclusion of the investigation of a complaint,

24

Defendant will communicate to the complaining party the results of the investigation

25

and a description of the remedial actions taken or proposed, if any.

26

10. Hammon’s above-referenced written anti-harassment policy will contain a

27

complaint procedure, that will encourage employees to come forward with complaints

28

about violations of its harassment policy. As part of the policy, Defendant shall provide

CONSENT DECREE

Page 3

Case 5:06-cv-06140-RS Document 34 Filed 10/22/2007 Page 4 of 6

1 its employees with convenient, confidential and reliable mechanisms for reporting

2 incidents of harassment and retaliation. Defendant’s anti-harassment policy will notify

3 employees that they may lodge a complaint with their immediate supervisor or with

4 Glenn Phinney. The complaint procedure will provide a method for employees to make

5 complaints in Spanish. Hammon’s written complaint procedure will be posted, in

6 Spanish and English, in a prominent place accessible to all employees.

7

11. Within ten (10) days of the completion of its anti-harassment policy,

8 Hammon will distribute it to all workers, and will provide copies to all new and

9 returning workers as they enter or re-enter the workforce.

10

Training

11

12. Hammon will use an outside consultant, paid for by Hammon, to train all

12 employees, once within every ten (10) months period during the term of this decree

13 (three trainings total), concerning sex and national origin discrimination, including the

14 legal prohibitions on harassment. Said trainings will be of no less than two hours in

15 length per training, and will be introduced by a member of upper management for

16 Hammon. Said trainings will be conducted in both Spanish and English.

17

Record Keeping and Reports

18

13. Within ten (10) days of the completion of its anti-harassment policy,

19 Hammon will send a copy of said policy to counsel for the Commission.

20

14. Within thirty (30) days after completing each training session described in

21 Paragraph 12, Hammon will mail to counsel for the Commission a report containing the

22 date of training, the name and position of the individual from upper management who

23 introduced the training, an outline of the training content, a list of all attendees, and

24 copies of all materials distributed at the training.

25

15. Once every six (6) months, to be measured beginning at the date of entry of

26 this Consent Decree and continuing for the duration of this Consent Decree, Hammon

27 will notify the counsel for the Commission whether it has received any complaints of

28 sexual harassment or national origin harassment from its employees (whether said

CONSENT DECREE

Page 4

Case 5:06-cv-06140-RS Document 34 Filed 10/22/2007 Page 5 of 6

1 complaints were filed with an administrative agency or simply raised to a management

2 official at the workplace), what steps were taken in response to such complaint, and how

3 the situation was resolved.

4 MONETARY RELIEF

5

16. Hammon will pay the sum of $115,000.00 as damages and in complete

6 satisfaction of the Commission’s claims against Hammon as set forth in its Complaint.

7 This sum will be allocated by the Commission, at its sole discretion, among the charging

8 parties and similarly situated employees. This sum will be paid by check made out

9 directly to each individual designated by the Commission, and will be mailed to them in

10 care of the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, to the Commission trial

11 attorney’s attention. Said checks will be sent by Hammon within sixty (60) days of

12 transmission of the names of the individuals to whom the sum is being allocated and the

13 amount of allocation to each individual.

14 EXPIRATION OF CONSENT DECREE

15

17. This Consent Decree constitutes a full and final resolution of all the

16 Commission’s claims against Hammon in this action. This Consent Decree will be in

17 effect for two and a half years (thirty months) , and will expire at midnight of the date

18 two and a half years (thirty months) after its entry by the Court, provided that Hammon

19 has substantially complied with the terms of this Consent Decree. Hammon will be

20 deemed to have complied substantially if the Court has not made any findings or orders

21 during the term of the Decree that Hammon has failed to comply with any of the terms of

22 this Decree.

23 //

24 //

25 //

26 //

27 //

28 //

CONSENT DECREE

Page 5

Case 5:06-cv-06140-RS Document 34 Filed 10/22/2007 Page 6 of 6

1

E-filing concurrence: I, Cindy O’Hara, attorney for Plaintiff Commission, attest

2 that I have obtained the concurrence of Christopher Cobey, attorney for Defendant

3 Hammon Plating Corporation, for the lodging of this Consent Decree.

4

5 On Behalf of Plaintiff Commission:

On Behalf of Defendant:

6 Dated: October 17, 2007
7 EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY
8 COMMISSION

Dated: October 17, 2007 LITTLER MENDELSON

9 ___/S/_______________________ CINDY O’HARA
10 Senior Trial Attorney
11

___/S/___________________________ CHRISTOPHER COBEY Attorneys for Defendant Hammon Plating Corporation

12
13 It is so ordered.
14

ORDER

15

October 22, 2007

Dated:_____________________

16

____________________________________ U.S. District Court Judge

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

CONSENT DECREE

Page 6

 
 CAND-ECF

https://ecf.cand.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/DktRpt.pl?582257850735717-L_1...

ADRMOP, CLOSED, E-Filing, MEDTERM
U.S. District Court California Northern District (San Jose) CIVIL DOCKET FOR CASE #: 5:06-cv-06140-RS

Equal Employment Opportunity Commission v. Hammon Plating Corporation Assigned to: Magistrate Judge Richard Seeborg Cause: 42:1983 Civil Rights (Employment Discrimination)

Date Filed: 09/29/2006 Date Terminated: 10/22/2007 Jury Demand: None Nature of Suit: 442 Civil Rights: Jobs Jurisdiction: U.S. Government Plaintiff

Plaintiff
Equal Employment Opportunity Commission

represented by Cindy O'Hara Equal Employment Opportunity Commission 350 The Embarcadero, Suite 500 San Francisco, CA 94105-1260 415/625-5653 Fax: 415-625-5657 Email: cindy.ohara@eeoc.gov LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

Jonathan T. Peck U.S. EEOC 350 Embarcadero Street Suite 500 San Francisco, CA 94105-1687 415/625-5600 Fax: 415-625-5657 Email: Jonathan.Peck@eeoc.gov LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

William Robert Tamayo U.S. EEOC 350 Embarcadero Street Suite 500 San Francisco, CA 94105-1687 415-625-5645 Fax: 415-625-5657 Email: william.tamayo@eeoc.gov LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

1 of 6

3/18/2008 2:01 PM

CAND-ECF

https://ecf.cand.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/DktRpt.pl?582257850735717-L_1...

V. Defendant Hammon Plating Corporation

Elizabeth Esparza-Cervantes U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission 350 The Embarcadero, Suite 500 San Francisco, CA 94105 415-625-5658 Fax: 415-625-5657 Email: Elizabeth.Esparza-Cervantes@eeoc.gov ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
represented by Christopher E. Cobey Littler Mendelson 50 W. San Fernando Street, 14th Floor San Jose, CA 95113 408/998-4150 Email: ccobey@littler.com LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
Nora R Culver Littler Mendelson 50 W Fernando St 14th Fl San Jose, CA 95113 408-998-4150 Fax: 408-288-5686 ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
William R. Rapoport Law Offices of William R. Rapoport 643 Bair Island Road Suite 400 Redwood City, CA 94063 (650) 340-7107 Fax: (650) 572 1857 Email: williamrapoport@yahoo.com ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

Date Filed 09/29/2006

# Docket Text
1 COMPLAINT for Civil Rights - Employment Discrimination against Hammon Plating Corporation (Summons Issued); jury demand;. Filed by Equal Employment Opportunity Commission. (Fee Waived) (bw, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 9/29/2006) Additional attachment(s) added on 10/3/2006 (bw, COURT STAFF).

2 of 6

3/18/2008 2:01 PM

CAND-ECF
09/29/2006 09/29/2006 10/02/2006 11/06/2006
11/06/2006 11/16/2006 11/21/2006 11/22/2006
11/27/2006 12/11/2006 12/12/2006 12/13/2006

https://ecf.cand.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/DktRpt.pl?582257850735717-L_1...
(Entered: 10/02/2006)
2 ADR SCHEDULING ORDER: Case Management Statement due by 12/27/2006. Case Management Conference set for 1/3/2007 02:30 PM. (Attachments: # 1 Standing Order)(bw, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 9/29/2006) (Entered: 10/02/2006)
Summons Issued as to Hammon Plating Corporation. (bw, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 9/29/2006) (Entered: 10/02/2006)
CASE DESIGNATED for Electronic Filing. (bw, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 10/2/2006) (Entered: 10/02/2006)
3 Notice of Motion and Motion to Dismiss or, in the Alternative, To Stay; Memorandum of Points and Authorities in Support of Motion filed by Hammon Plating Corporation. Motion Hearing set for 12/20/2006 09:30 AM in Courtroom #4, 5th Floor, San Jose. (Cobey, Christopher) (Filed on 11/6/2006) Text modified on 11/7/2006 to conform to document caption post by counsel (bw, COURT STAFF). (Entered: 11/06/2006)
4 Declaration of Christopher E. Cobey in Support of Motion of Defendant Hammon Plating Corporation to Dismiss, Or, In the Alternative, To Stay This Action filed byHammon Plating Corporation. (Cobey, Christopher) (Filed on 11/6/2006) (Entered: 11/06/2006)
5 CONSENT to Proceed Before a US Magistrate Judge by Equal Employment Opportunity Commission.. (O'Hara, Cindy) (Filed on 11/16/2006) (Entered: 11/16/2006)
6 CONSENT to Proceed Before a US Magistrate Judge by Hammon Plating Corporation.. (Cobey, Christopher) (Filed on 11/21/2006) (Entered: 11/21/2006)
7 STIPULATION to Move Date of Hearing on Motion; Order re 3 Notice of Motion and Motion to Dismiss or, in the Alternative, To Stay; Memorandum of Points and Authorities in Support of MotionTo Continue Hearing Date to January 3, 2007 by Equal Employment Opportunity Commission. (O'Hara, Cindy) (Filed on 11/22/2006) Text modified on 11/29/2006 to conform to document caption post by counsel (bw, COURT STAFF). (Entered: 11/22/2006)
8 ORDER re 7 Stipulation, filed by Equal Employment Opportunity Commission. Signed by Judge Richard Seeborg on 11/27/06. (rssec, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 11/27/2006) (Entered: 11/27/2006)
9 CLERK'S NOTICE. Case Management Conference continued to 3/7/2007 02:30 PM. (rssec, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 12/11/2006) (Entered: 12/11/2006)
10 ADR Certification (ADR L.R. 3-5b) of discussion of ADR options (Esparza-Cervantes, Elizabeth) (Filed on 12/12/2006) (Entered: 12/12/2006)
11 Stipulated Miscellaneous Administrative Request to File Documents Under Seal; Stipulation; Order filed by Equal Employment Opportunity Commission. (O'Hara, Cindy) (Filed on 12/13/2006) Text modified on 12/14/2006 to conform to document caption post by counsel (bw, COURT STAFF). (Entered: 12/13/2006)

3 of 6

3/18/2008 2:01 PM

CAND-ECF
12/14/2006 12/14/2006
12/15/2006
12/20/2006
01/03/2007 01/10/2007 01/22/2007 01/22/2007 01/25/2007 01/30/2007
02/05/2007 02/23/2007
4 of 6

https://ecf.cand.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/DktRpt.pl?582257850735717-L_1...
12 ORDER by Judge Richard Seeborg granting 11 Motion to Seal. (rssec, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 12/14/2006) (Entered: 12/14/2006)
15 Declaration of Kristine Jensen in Support of Plaintiff EEOC's Memorndum of Points and Authorities in Opposition to Defendants Motion to Dismiss or, in the Alternative, to Stay (DOCUMENT FILED UNDER SEAL) filed by Equal Employment Opportunity Commission. (bw, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 12/14/2006) (Entered: 12/26/2006)
13 AMENDED Table of Contents and Table of Authorities to Plaintiff EEOC's Memorandum of Points and Authorities in Opposition to Defendant's Motion to Dismiss or, in the Alternative, to Stay filed by Equal Employment Opportunity Commission. Amendment to 12 Order on Motion to Seal Amended Table of Contents & Table of Authorities to Plaintiff EEOC's Opposition . (O'Hara, Cindy) (Filed on 12/15/2006) Text modified on 12/18/2006 to conform to document caption post by counsel (bw, COURT STAFF). (Entered: 12/15/2006)
14 REPLY BRIEF OF DEFENDANT HAMMON PLATING CORPORATION IN SUPPORT OF ITS MOTION TO DISMISS OR, IN THE ALTERNATIVE, TO STAY THIS ACTION ( 3 ) filed by Hammon Plating Corporation. (Cobey, Christopher) (Filed on 12/20/2006) Text modified on 12/21/2006 to conform to document caption post by counsel (bw, COURT STAFF). Modified on 12/27/2006 (bw, COURT STAFF). (Entered: 12/20/2006)
16 Minute Entry: Motion Hearing held on 1/3/2007 before Judge Richard Seeborg (Date Filed: 1/3/2007). (Tape #FTR.) (mpb, COURT STAFF) (Date Filed: 1/3/2007) (Entered: 01/03/2007)
17 Letter from Counsel for Plaintiff EEOC and Defendant Hammon Re: ADR Process. (O'Hara, Cindy) (Filed on 1/10/2007) (Entered: 01/10/2007)
18 ORDER by Judge Richard Seeborg denying 3 Motion to Dismiss. (rssec, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 1/22/2007) (Entered: 01/22/2007)
CASE REFERRED to Mediation. (rssec, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 1/22/2007) (Entered: 01/22/2007)
19 ADR Clerk's Notice Appointing Jessica M. Notini as Mediator. (cmf, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 1/25/2007) (Entered: 01/25/2007)
20 PROOF OF SERVICE OF Summons and Complaint ( 1 ) , with Acknowledgement of Receipt of Service filed by Equal Employment Opportunity Commission. (O'Hara, Cindy) (Filed on 1/30/2007) Text modified on 1/31/2007 to conform to document caption post by counsel (bw, COURT STAFF). (Entered: 01/30/2007)
21 Appearance of Co-Counsel for Defendant Harmon Plating Corporation by Hammon Plating Corporation. (Rapoport, William) (Filed on 2/5/2007) Text modified on 2/6/2007 to conform to document caption post by counsel (bw, COURT STAFF). (Entered: 02/05/2007)
22 ANSWER to Complaint by Hammon Plating Corporation. (Cobey, Christopher) (Filed on 2/23/2007) Modified on 2/26/2007 (bw, COURT STAFF). (Entered: 02/23/2007)
3/18/2008 2:01 PM

CAND-ECF
02/28/2007
02/28/2007
02/28/2007 05/17/2007 05/23/2007 06/05/2007 06/05/2007 07/25/2007 08/03/2007 09/19/2007 09/19/2007 10/17/2007
5 of 6

https://ecf.cand.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/DktRpt.pl?582257850735717-L_1...
23 *** FILED IN ERROR. PLEASE SEE DOCKET # 24 . *** STIPULATION re 9 Clerks Notice to Continue Case Management Conference by Equal Employment Opportunity Commission. (O'Hara, Cindy) (Filed on 2/28/2007) Modified on 2/28/2007 (ewn, COURT STAFF). (Entered: 02/28/2007)
24 STIPULATION and (Proposed) Order to Continue Case Management Conference CORRECTION OF DOCKET # 23 by Equal Employment Opportunity Commission. (O'Hara, Cindy) (Filed on 2/28/2007) Text modified on 2/28/2007 to conform to document caption post by counsel (bw, COURT STAFF). (Entered: 02/28/2007)
25 ORDER re 24 Stipulation filed by Equal Employment Opportunity Commission. Initial Case Management Conference continued 6/6/2007 02:30 PM. Signed by Judge Richard Seeborg on 2/28/07. (rssec, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 2/28/2007) (Entered: 02/28/2007)
26 CLERK'S NOTICE Case Management Conference continued to 6/13/2007 02:30 PM. (rssec, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 5/17/2007) (Entered: 05/17/2007)
Set/Reset Hearings: Mediation Hearing set for 6/29/2007. Counsel will request an extension of time to complete mediation at the 6/13/2007 Case Management Conference. (cmf, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 5/23/2007) (Entered: 05/23/2007)
27 SECOND STIPULATION and (Proposed) Order to continue Case Management Conference & Mediation by Equal Employment Opportunity Commission. (O'Hara, Cynthia) (Filed on 6/5/2007) Text modified on 6/6/2007 to conform to document caption post by counsel (bw, COURT STAFF). (Entered: 06/05/2007)
28 ORDER re 27 Stipulation filed by Equal Employment Opportunity Commission. Initial Case Management Conference continued to 7/25/2007 02:30 PM. Signed by Judge Richard Seeborg on 6/5/07. (rssec, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 6/5/2007) (Entered: 06/05/2007)
29 CLERK'S NOTICE. Case Management Conference continued to 9/26/2007 02:30 PM. (rssec, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 7/25/2007) (Entered: 07/25/2007)
30 CERTIFICATION OF MEDIATION Session by Mediator, Jessica M. Notini; Mediation session held 6/29/2007; Case settled; Mediation process is complete. (cmf, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 8/3/2007) (Entered: 08/03/2007)
31 STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER CONTINUING CASE MANAGEMENT CONFERENCE (L.R. 16-10(c)) by Hammon Plating Corporation. (Cobey, Christopher) (Filed on 9/19/2007) (Entered: 09/19/2007)
32 ORDER CONTINUING CASE MANAGEMENT CONFERENCE. Case Management Conference set for 10/24/2007 02:30 PM. Signed by Judge Richard Seeborg on 9/19/07. (rssec, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 9/19/2007) (Entered: 09/19/2007)
33 (Proposed) Consent Decree by Equal Employment Opportunity Commission. (O'Hara, Cynthia) (Filed on 10/17/2007) Text modified on 10/17/2007 (bw, COURT STAFF). Modified on 10/22/2007 (rssec, COURT STAFF). (Entered: 10/17/2007)
3/18/2008 2:01 PM

CAND-ECF
10/22/2007

https://ecf.cand.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/DktRpt.pl?582257850735717-L_1...
34 CONSENT DECREE re 33 . Signed by Judge Richard Seeborg on 10/22/07. (rssec, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 10/22/2007) (Entered: 10/22/2007)

PACER Service Center

Transaction Receipt

03/18/2008 12:01:20

PACER Login: wu0079

Client Code:

Description:

Docket Report

Search Criteria:

Billable Pages: 4

Cost:

eeoc 5:06-cv-06140-RS 0.32

6 of 6

3/18/2008 2:01 PM