Case 2:03-cv-07013-MAN Document 42 Filed 08/04/2004 Page 1 of 4

"
DOCKETED ON eM

Priority Send

AUG - 63114

I

f'
I\.

r-.

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

Enter Closed -:-1S-5/JS_6 -

JS-2I)S_3 -

BY J), Vf\ 052

CIVIL MINUTES--GENERAL

Scan Only=

Case No. CV 03 -701-3 -TJH (RCx)

u Date: August 4, 2004 ~

Title: u.s. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission v. BSH Home
,Appliance Corp.
====================================================================
DOCKET ENTRY

=================:==:=:=========:=::::=========:=:=:::==============

PRESENT: HON. ROSALYN M. CHAPMAN, UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

Debra Taylor-Spears Deputy Clerk

None Court Reporter

ATTORNEYS PRESENT FOR PLAINTIFF; Sue J. Noh
Carla D. Barboza

ATTORNEYS PRESENT FOR DEFENDANT(S) ; Rachel Cowen

PROCEEDINGS: (1) ORDER GRANTING, IN PART, AND DENYING, IN PART, PLAINTIFF EEOC'S MOTION TO COMPEL RESPONSES TO FIRST AND SECOND SETS OF REQUESTS FOR INSPECTION AND COPYING OF DOCUMENTS; AND (2) ORDER SETTING DEPOSITION SCHEDULE

On July 7, 2004, plaintiff EEOC filed a notice of motion and motion to compel responses to plaintiff EEOC's first and second sets of requests for inspection and copying of documents and joint stipulation, with declarations and exhibits. On July 13, 2004, plaintiff EEOC filed a supplemental memorandum.
Oral argument was held before Magistrate Judge Rosalyn M. Chapman on August 4, 2004. Plaintiff EEOC was represented by Susan J. Noh, plaintiffs in intervention were represented by Carla D. Barboza, attorney at law, and defendant was represented by Rachel Cowen, attorney at law with the firm Connelly Sheehan Moran.
The Court, having read all documents and heard oral argument, HEREBY RULES AND ORDERS:
1. Regarding set no. I, plaintiff EEOC's motion to compel the production of documents without redaction of Social Security numbers is denied.

Case 2:03-cv-07013-MAN Document 42 Filed 08/04/2004 Page 2 of 4
2. Regarding set no. 1, the Court does not have sufficient information to rule on plaintiff EEOC's request to compel two emall documents listed on defendant's privilege log as protected by th~ attorney/client privilege; thus, defendant is ordered to produce~to plaintiff EEOC, no later than August 18, 2004, a declaration or Ij
declarations supporting its claim of attorney/client privilege. I,",
3. All privilege logs shall comply Model Form 11:A, set forth ~n the Rutter Group Practice Guide, Federal Civil Procedure Before Trial. All parties shall, no later than August 18, 2004, amend their privilege logs to meet this requirement.
4. All discovery responses shall be supplemented, pursuant to Rule 26(e), commencing September 1, 2004, at monthly intervals.
5. Regarding set no. 2, the Court hereby denies defendant's relevancy objections. In light of the pleading of Doe defendants in both the original complaint and first amended complaint, the discussion in the Rule 26(f) report of adding defendant's parent corporation and its affiliate corporation as defendants," and the lack of cut-off dates for adding parties or amending pleadings in this action, the Court finds plaintiff EEOC's requests are relevant and within the scope of Rule 26(b). Additionally, the Court finds defendant's reliance on EEOC v. Pierce Packing Co., 669 F.2d 605, 608 (9th Cir. 1982) is misplaced. See EEOC v. Bruno's Restaurant, 13 F.3d 285, 287 (9th Cir. 1993). Defendant cannot unilaterally determine whether plaintiff EEOC has met compliance requirements; rather, District Judge Terry J. Hatter, Jr., will make that determination when, and if, plaintiff EEOC moves to name as Does defendant's parent corporation and/or its affiliate corporation. See, ~, EEOC v. Asplundh Tree Expert Co., 340 F.3d 1256, 1259 n.l (11th Cir. 2003) (holding c9urt may stay action pending conciliation) .
6. Regarding set no. 2, the Court finds many of plaintiff EEOC's requests are overly broad, as defendant has ,objected. Nevertheless, the Court is able to narrow the requests so they seek only "primary" documents, rather than "secondary" documents, pertaining to defendant, its parent corporation and its affiliate corporation covering the period of 1999 to the present, and such documents include: documents pertaining to this action; fee service agreements; public documents submitted to various governmental agencies; organizational charts; leases; balance sheets; budgets; advertising agreements; training manuals; employee manuals; job descriptions for management or supervisory personnel in the buying department, engineering department, human resources department, and labor relations department; and the front page of federal tax
2

Case 2:03-cv-07013-MAN Document 42 Filed 08/04/2004 Page 3 of 4
.,

returns. motion to

Narrowing compel as

plaintiff EEOC's requests, the to all requests except nos. 28

Court grants and 38, and

othe
LU

orders defendant to produce responsive primary documents to

plaintiff EEOC, no later than August 18, 2004. After plaintiff EEOC ~
has examined these primary documents, it can determine whether U secondary documents are required and, if so, renew its motion. V)

7. Regarding plaintiff EEOC's motion to compel depositions of defendant's management employee witnesses, the Court hereby takes off calendar the hearing on that matter scheduled for August 18, 2004.

8. Pursuant to the stipulation of the parties, the Court hereby orders the depositions set forth below for defendant's present and former employees, and all of these depositions shall take place at plaintiff EEOC's offices in Los Angeles:

a. The deposition of Charlene Brown shall take place on September 7, 2004;

b. The deposition of Jan Mackay shall taken place on September 8, 2004;

c. The deposition of Ingo Holeschovsky shall take place on September 14, 2004;

d. The deposition of Mark Weifenbach shall take place on September 21, 2004;

e. The deposition of Rod Koral shall take place on October 1, 2004;

f. The deposition of John Gillespie shall take place on October 4, 2004;

g. The deposition of Stephan Lauwitz shall take place on October 5, 2004; and

h. The deposition of Frank Essig shall take place on October 12-13, 2004.

9. The parties are ordered to enter into a protective order, to be presented to the Court for its approval, no later than August 18, 2004.

3

Case 2:03-cv-07013-MAN Document 42 Filed 08/04/2004 Page 4 of 4

10. The Court amends Local Rule 37 1 for this action, and

requires counsel to meet in person prior to filing any discovery'l~J

motions.

z

Service List:
Sue J. Noh 255 East Temple Street 4th Floor Los Angeles, CA 90012
Carla D. Barboza 660 S. Figueroa St., Ste. 1620 Los Angeles, CA 90017

Michael James Sheehan Jackie V. Iannicelli Rachel Cowen Connelly Sheehan Moran 150 S. Wacker Dr., Ste. 1600 Chicago, IL 60606
Ellen DeVoe Stuart Thompson and Alessio 2550 5th Ave., Ste. 518 San Diego, CA 92103

docs\03-7013,1
8/5/04

Cl.rk~ Initi.,. nf Daputy

4

 
 • Case 2:03-cv-07013-MAN

Document 57

• Filed 03/03/2005

Page 1 of 12

.'

.
'

1 2

AUSun.Sen.a1E.YQN.UoPhAa1rLSkhoESNMB1NP9L21O16Y3442M4E2NT

ORIGINAL '~'j _,J J,]

OPPORtUNITY COMMISSION

?~ r ~:,

3 255 East Temple Street, 4th Floor

1:(

Los Angeles CA 90012 4 Telephone: (213) 894-1082
Facsimile: (213) 894-1301

ENTERED ClERK, U,S DISTRICT COURT
i I

FILED

~;; i

CLERK, U,S DISTRICT OUR

5

MAR 4205

6

Attom~s for Plaintiff OEQPPUOARLTEUMNPITLYOYCMOMENMTISSIO'~~NT~A.~

,
OIS~~~

CALlb~~~i~

7

MAR - 3 200

CENT
BY

RA'-

DISS~~:'TIFC

LlDFEOPRUNTIAY

8

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

-9
~'---lo
15 16

CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

t'-

i

EQU1\L~MPLbYMENT

I
CASE NO.: LACY 03-7013 TJH (MAN)

OPPOR"I;QNIT¥ COMMISSION,

C'.) ._;-'<.(> \
?i:Pl~iii~ff, \

[~ CONSENT DECREE

-v \ ~);"£ l
('.I ~.;~;
~ :'i,~.<;· '\
<t =~.,-,
BSH1iO~ APPLIANCES
CORPOIDttION, AND DQES 1-10 Inclusive,O '"

Honorable Margaret A. Nagle

r.:{,. Priority •

Send

r-

Enter 'r-

e lo,ed . f-,-,

~/JS-6 .~

JS-2/JS-3 -t--

Defendants.

Scan OnlY_I--

17 ERIKA SALGADO and
18 MICHELLE HERNANDEZ

19

Plaintiffs in Intervention,

THIS CONSTITUTES NOTICE OF ENTRY AS REQUIRED BY FRCP, RULE 77(d).

20

v.

21 BSH HOME APPLIANCES CORPORATION, AND DOES 1-10
22 Inclusive,

23

Defendants.

24

25

26

27

28

• Case 2:03-cv-07013-MAN

Document 57

• Filed 03/03/2005

Page 2 of 12

"

1 I. INTRODUCTION

2

PlaintiffU.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission ("EEOC"),

3 Defendant BSH Home Appliances Corporation ("BSH"), and Plaintiffs in

4 Intervention Erika Salgado ("Salgado") and Michelle Hernandez ("Hernandez")

5 hereby stipulate and agree to entry of this Consent Decree to resolve the EEOC's

6 Complaint, filed under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, as amended,

7 Section 706(f)(1) and (3) ofTitle VII ofthe Civil Rights Act of 1964, as amended,

8 42 U.S.C. § 2000e-5(f)(1) and (3), and Section 102 of the Civil Rights Act of

9 1991,42 U.S.C. § 1981a ("Title VII"), and to resolve Salgado's and Hernandez's

10 related Complaint-in-Intervention. The EEOC's Complaint alleges that BSH

11 subjected Salgado and Hernandez to sexual harassment and that BSH retaliated

12 against Salgado when she opposed and complained about the harassment.

13 Salgado's and Hernandez's Complaint-in-Intervention alleges Title VII and related

14 state law claims. BSH denies liability as to all allegations in the Complaints.

15 II. JURISDICTION

16

The Court has jurisdiction over the parties and the subject matter of this

17 lawsuit, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. Sections 451, 1331, 1337, 1343, 1345, 1367 and 42

18 U.S.C.2000e-5(f). The Court shall retain jurisdiction of this action during the

19 duration of the Decree for the purposes of entering all orders, judgments and

20 decrees which may be necessary to implement and/or enforce the relief provided

21 herein or to otherwise effectuate the purposes of the Decree.

22 III. PURPOSES AND SCOPE OF THE CONSENT DECREE

23

A. The parties to this Consent Decree ("Decree") are the EEOC, BSH,

24 Salgado, and Hernandez (the "Parties"). The scope of this Decree includes BSH's

25 Huntington Beach, California facility. This Decree shall be binding on and

26 enforceable against BSH and its officers, directors, agents, successors and assigns.

27

B. As a result of having engaged in comprehensive settlement

28 negotiations the Parties have agreed that this action should be finally resolved by

2

• Case 2:03-cv-07013-MAN

Document 57

• Filed 03/03/2005

Page 3 of 12

1 entry of this Decree for the following purposes:

:.J

2

1. To avoid expensive and protracted costs incident to litigation;. Ii!

~::

3

2. To provide a final and binding settlement upon the Parties as to :r:

i J,

4 all claims alleged in the respective Complaints filed by the EEOC, Salgado and

5 Hernandez;

6

3. To provide monetary and injunctive relief;

7

4. To ensure that BSH's employment policies and procedures

8 comply with federal law;

9

5. To ensure training for BSH employees with respect to their

10 obligations under Title VII;

11

6. To prevent and correct discrimination in the workplace;

12

7. To provide effective responses to discrimination complaints;

13 and

14

8. To prevent retaliation against employees who engage in

15 protected activities under Title VII.

16 IV. EFFECTIVE DATE AND DURATION OF DECREE

17

A. The provisions and agreements contained herein are effective

18 immediately upon the date on which this Decree is entered by the Court ("the

19 Effective Date").

20

B. Except as otherwise provided herein, the Decree shall remain in effect

21 for twelve (12) months after the Effective Date.

22 V. FINDINGS

23

Having examined the terms and provisions of this Decree and based on the

24 pleadings, record and stipulation of the Parties, the Court finds the following:

25

A. The Court has jurisdiction over the Parties and the subject matter of

26 this action. The Complaint and Complaint-in-Intervention assert claims that, if

27 proven, would authorize the Court to grant the relief set forth in this Decree.

28

B. The terms and provisions of this Decree are adequate, fair,

3

• Case 2:03-cv-07013-MAN

Document 57

• Filed 03/03/2005

Page 4 of 12

1 reasonable, equitable and just. The rights of the EEOC, BSH, Salgado, r:i
2 Hernandez, and the public interest for which the EEOC seeks redress are protected ~;!

,~::

3 adequately by this Decree.

<I:

-)

4

C. This Decree confonns with the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure and /)

5 Title VII and is not in derogation of the rights and privileges of any person. The

6 entry of this Decree will further the objectives of Title VII and will be in the best

7 interest of the Parties.

8 VI. RESOLUTION OF CLAIMS

9

A. The Parties agree that this Decree constitutes a complete resolution of

10 EEOC Charge Nos. 340A200388 and 340A200400, the Complaint and Complaint-

II in-Intervention filed in this action. The Decree does not, however, resolve any

12 charges of discrimination that may be pending with or brought in the future before

13 the EEOC other than the charge specifically referred to in this paragraph.

14

B. Nothing in this Decree shall be construed to limit or reduce BSH's

15 obligation to comply fully with Title VII or any other federal employment statute.

16

C. This Decree in no way affects the EEOC's right to bring, process,

17 investigate or litigate other charges that may be in existence or may later arise

18 against BSH in accordance with standard EEOC procedures.

19 VII. MONETARY RELIEF

20

A. Within ten business days after the Effective Date, BSH shall deliver

21 to Erika Salgado and Michelle Hernandez, in care of their attorney, Carla D.

22 Barboza of Barboza & Associates at 660 South Figueroa Street, Suite 1620, Los

23 Angeles, California 90017, via overnight mail, a check made payable to "The

24 Trust Account of Barboza & Associates, A.L.C." in the amount of$75,000 to

25 compensate them for their alleged emotional distress damages. BSH shall also

26 mail a copy of the check to Anna Y. Park, Regional Attorney, U.S. Equal

27 Employment Opportunity Commission at 255 East Temple Street, Fourth Floor,

28 Los Angeles, California 90012.

4

• Case 2:03-cv-07013-MAN

Document 57

• Filed 03/03/2005

Page 5 of 12

1

B. BSH shall issue a 1099 form to Barboza & Associates, A.L.C. for .the

2 full amount of the settlement.

3 VIII. INJUNCTIVE RELIEF

4

A. Non-Discrimination

5

BSH, its officers, agents, management (including all supervisory

6 employees), successors, and assigns, hereby agree (1) not to engage in sexual

7 harassment or other form of sex discrimination; (2) to prevent and correct any

8 harassment or other discrimination on the basis of sex; and (3) to ensure that

9 employees who complain about or resist discrimination on the basis of sex are not

10 subjected to any tangible employment actions.

11

B. Anti-Retaliation

12

BSH, its officers, agents, management (including all supervisory

13 employees), successors, and assigns, hereby agree not to retaliate against any

14 current or former employee ofBSH for: (a) opposing any practice made unlawful

15 under Title VII; (b) engaging in protected activity under Title VII; (c) filing a

16 charge of discrimination; (d) participating in any manner in any investigation

17 (including any internal investigation undertaken by BSH) or proceeding relating to

18 any alleged Title VII violation; (e) being identified as a possible witness or

19 claimant pertaining to any alleged Title VII violation; (t) asserting any rights

20 under this Decree; or (t) receiving any relief under this Decree.

21

C. Revision to Anti-Harassment Policy

22

By no later than April 1, 2005, BSH shall post in conspicuous places

23 throughout the Huntington Beach facility the revised Sexual Harassment Policy.

24 This Sexual Harassment policy shall also be issued to all employees during the

25 training described in Section D.

26

D. Training

27

1. By no later than April 15, 2005, BSH shall provide sexual

28 harassment training to all employees at BSH's Huntington Beach facility.

5

• Case 2:03-cv-07013-MAN

Document 57

• Filed 03/03/2005

Page 6 of 12

I

a. All employees' training shall include coverage of the

2 subjects of equal employment opportunity rights and responsibilities,

3 discrimination, retaliation, and BSH's revised policies and procedures for

4 reporting and handling complaints of discrimination and retaliation.

5

b. Separate training of managerial employees shall include

6 training on how to take preventive and corrective measures against discrimination,

7 how to receive and investigate or report to designated officials complaints of

8 discrimination or retaliation, and how to recognize, prevent, and correct

9 retaliation.

10

c. The law finn of Connelly Sheehan Harris shall review

11 and approve all training materials.

12

2. BSH shall provide sexual harassment training to employees

13 hired after April 15, 2005, within a reasonable period of time after their hire.

14

E. Monitoring

15

For any complaint of sexual harassment received by BSH's Huntington

16 Beach facility during the tenn of this Consent Decree, BSH shall also have the law

17 finn of Connelly Sheehan Harris monitor BSH's investigation and respond to the

18 complaint.

19

F. Neutral References

20

BSH shall provide neutral letters of reference to Salgado and Hernandez.

21 BSH will provide no further infonnation regarding Salgado and Hernandez

22 without a release executed by Salgado or Hernandez, respectively.

23 IX. RECORDKEEPING AND REPORTING

24

BSH shall establish a record-keeping procedure that provides for the

25 centralized tracking of complaints of discrimination and the monitoring of such

26 complaints to prevent retaliation. The records to be maintained during the period

27 of this Consent Decree shall include:

28

1. All documents generated in connection with any complaint,

6

• Case 2:03-cv-07013-MAN

Document 57

• Filed 03/03/2005

Page 7 of 12

1 investigation into, or resolution of every complaint of discrimination or retaliation,

,1

2 for the duration of the Decree and the identities of the parties involved, including, I!

~:~

3 but not limited to, the complainant, alleged perpetrator, investigator(s),

:':

/"1

4 witness(es), and decision-maker(s), notes, witness statements, drafts and final

5 internal memorandum on the investigation and resolution, and documents

6 reflecting any discipline considered, proposed, and applied;

7

2. A copy of the revised policy against discrimination and retaliation

8 and any revisions to the policy thereafter; and

9

3. Copies of all training materials and a list of the names and positions

10 of employment of each employee who attended each training required and

11 provided under this Decree, classified by the date and type of training

12 (management versus non-managerial staft).

13

BSH shall provide copies of the aforementioned records to the EEOC within

14 ten (10) business days following a written request by the EEOC. BSH shall

15 provide a complete copy of the records. IfBSH withholds any documents as

16 privileged, then it shall produce a privilege log in accordance with the Federal

17 Rules of Civil Procedures and the Local Rules for the Central District of

18 California. The records shall be submitted to the Regional Attorney, EEOC Los

19 Angeles District Office, 255 East Temple St., 4th Floor, Los Angeles, CA 90012. If

20 BSH does not receive any discrimination complaints between the effective date of

21 this decree and a written request for records from the EEOC, BSH shall provide

22 the EEOC a declaration under penalty of perjury that no complaints were received.

23 X. MODIFICATION AND SEVERABILITY

24

A. This Decree constitutes the complete understanding of the Parties

25 with respect to the matters contained herein. No waiver, modification or

26 amendment of any provision of this Decree will be effective unless made in

27 writing and signed by an authorized representative of each of the Parties.

28

B. If one or more provisions of the Decree are rendered unlawful or

7

• Case 2:03-cv-07013-MAN

Document 57

• Filed 03/03/2005

Page 8 of 12

I unenforceable, the Parties shall make good faith efforts to agree upon appropriate

2 amendments to this Decree in order to effectuate the purposes of the Decree. In .

3 any event, the remaining provisions will remain in full force and effect unless the

4 purposes of the Decree cannot, despite the Parties' best efforts, be achieved.

5

C. By mutual agreement of the Parties, this Decree may be amended or

6 modified in the interests ofjustice and fairness in order to effectuate the

7 provisions of this Decree.

8 XI. COMPLIANCE AND DISPUTE RESOLUTION

9

A. The Parties expressly agree that if the EEOC has reason to believe

10 that BSH has failed to comply with any provision of this Consent Decree, the

II EEOC may petition this Court to enforce the Decree. Prior to initiating such

12 petition, the EEOC will notifY BSH and its legal counsel of record, in writing, of

13 the nature of the dispute. This notice shall specifY the particular provision(s) that

14 the EEOC believes has/have been breached. Absent a showing by either party that

15 the delay will cause irreparable harm, BSH shall have thirty days to attempt to

16 resolve or cure the breach.

17

B. The Parties agree to cooperate with each other and use their best

18 efforts to resolve any dispute referenced in the EEOC notice.

19

C. After thirty days have passed with no resolution or agreement to

20 extend the time further, the EEOC may petition this Court for compliance with this

21 Decree, seeking all available relief, including, but not limited to, the imposition of

22 attorneys' fees and costs and an extension of the term of the Decree for such

23 period of time as BSH is shown to be in breach of the Decree.

24 XII. COSTS OF ADMINISTRATION AND IMPLEMENTATION OF

25

CONSENT DECREE

26

BSH shall bear all costs associated with its administration and

27 implementation oflts obligations under this Consent Decree, including the costs of

28 the Consultant.

8

'.

• Case 2:03-cv-07013-MAN

Document 57

• Filed 03/03/2005

Page 9 of 12

XIII. COSTS AND ATTORNEYS' FEES

2

Each party shall bear its own costs of suit and attorneys' fees.

3 XIV. COUNTERPARTS AND FACSIMILE SIGNATURES

4

This Decree may be signed in counterparts. A facsimile signature shall have

5 the same force and effect of an original signature or copy thereof.

6a
ct'r\~
7 Dated: :Ellalllary ;)-, 2005 8

Respectfully submitted, U.S. E UAL EMPLOYMENT OPPOR UNITY COMMISSION

9

Anna Y. Park

Regional Attorney

Attorneys for Plaintiff EEOC

BSH HOME APPLIANCES CORPORAnON
By: s.u ~ ~fJnJwe ~e.
____, Pfesllfent

Rac e B. owen Attorneys for Defendant BSH
SIlLEr~diJ~ m" Plaintiff tn Intervention
Sd.M~e~ f13e
Plaintiff in Intervention

Dated: February __, 2005

Barboza & Associates

22

By: ~ ~ Sl1~ ~~'

23

Carla D. Bart%za

Attorneys for Salgado and Hernandez

24

[PROPOSED) ORDER

25

IT IS SO ORDERED.

26 DATED: mad. 3 , 2005

27

United States Magistrate Judge

28

9

c \

~121/1228/2/80/5200C5HaOsN1e212:42::01530-cFvA-1X01473-0~1l12i3Il3--M7~A9N68 DocumenCtO5NN7EBLSLHYFHSiLlHJeIYEdIEE:H0A A3NP/0P B3A/L2RI 0R0I~ S5

O~/Z8/05 iON 12:27 FAX 312 312 68

CONNELLY SBEB\Wl BARil.

Page 10 of 12

@002

I""'AOX., ~"',.~ ..

ile'OP

Cl
U,j :2~

I xm. costs AND ATI'ORNEYS' FIlS

2

Bach patEY sb.a11 bear ita OWD costs af.suit and 1II.tOnleys' fes.

3 XlV. COUNTERPARTS AND I'ACSIMlLE SIGNA'l"VRES

4

This J)CQQI may be sigaed in count.erparIs. A facsimile Aignatw:e shall have

S the same fi>tce aud fdfect ofIII ori.pDalsignature or copy thereof.

ReapeCttblly suhmittfd,

7 Dated: February--' 20GS
8

U.S. BOUALJiMPLOYMENT
O~~~~~ON

A1.1mncys ~ aSH

JilIiitbelle Hiriirilif'
Plaintiffio Inlaveo.tion

Batboza.,& Associates

By:'~C~UU~D~.~BU~oo~m~-----
At1I:m1cys for Salgado _d Hernandez

IJ1IRnPOUilJl npnja

26

IT IS so ORDBRED.

27 DATED', - - - - ' , 2005

28

Bon. ~A.l,If~ United. S1ites MagJStnlte ludge

9

I' I

)i!2/19/.2ElECl5ase162::E0lB3-cv-2017301632-9M5A3N0. B2f14/2E1as 16 9 21362~53a2
F"11-i005 Dl:4&PDI FrarfJiliAUIIIIT

. . Document 57 ?ARFBOilZe~d A0S3S/0O3C/2I0A0T5~ Page 11 of 12PAGE 62 '

BARBOZA ASSOCIATE""

PAGE as

213..m-1901

P'1 N31i DII1O F-SIII

c;

III

1

STS AND AT:1'ORNEYS' F.US

.".-, "".~
~ ..,.:"~ "

0:(

2-

party shall bear its own costs ofsuit and atto:mc:ys' fees.

C.,I
(Ij

3

UNTERPARTS AND FA.CSIMILE SlGNA1'lJRES

4

m f ' s Decree may be signed Q01.Ul.1eI:part. A facsimile sj~ 1have

5 the foroe and. effect ofan originalsigxl'tufe or copy' thereof.

I

6

i Re.spectf,ully submitted, I

7

U.S. EQUAL EMPLOYMENT

Ii

OPPOR1'llNITY COMMISSfON

$)

:By:

Amli

Y.

+L!:1!
,nu"

I
,

R.egioDtl Attom~ _~

10

Attor:ncYrfor Pla.txmffli..6Qq,

11 Dateclt ebruaxy ---' 2005
12

BSHHO)1.{8 APPLIANCES i

CORPORATION

: I

13

~:,- -_ -_ --_-.J'~P't=eS=ilk~ili ~! --

14 Dated: cbrLulry ---,2005
lS

16

h... 17
18

Datocl: ebtuary I"l.

2005

, 19

20 Dated: ebruary - - ' 2005

21 '22

Dared:

ebruety -I!/.... ZOOS

MiChelle Hiri'iiiidei j
Plaintiffin Interveftti'l"
Barboza ~.sIlOC~ ........'\...

23.

24

2:S

[pltOP<:W!DJ ORDER

26

IS SO ORDERED. _ _ _....J.ZOQS

27

HOii:Mam3ret A. Nagle I

28

UtJfted. StCteS Magitrmte JU(;iae

9

tnnlTnn'l/ TRI Til

Case 2:03-cv-07013-MAN Document 57

Filed 03/03/2005 Page 12 of 1t2 PA~!I1S 111,3 ,
NO. 201 P. 1 .

m-!IB4-1iDl'

T-nS5 P.UlI1D10 P-6GB

1 xm. COSTS AM) AttORNEYS' FEES

2.

:Each ~ 5hall bear its own costs ofsuit ad a.ttomeys' Dees.

3 XlV. COl.l'Nl'ERPARTS.AND :rACSIMII.iE 8.lGNATURES

4

nus Decree may be sig@d ic. CO~fS, A facsimile sign8'l.ll'e shall have

5 the ssm,e t'btce and efl'ect ofan arijinal siga.a1ure or copy 'Ibareof.

6

Re~ly submitted.

7 Dated: Feb:nwy - ' 2005 8

~_~~ON

9

10

11 Dated; p~ -,2005

12

13

14 'Paled: Februal:y ~ 2005

1:5

16

17
Dated.: February ---' 2005
18

14. 19 Dated: February 2005 2.0

21

o.d: tlebtwJ.r.y ---J ZOOS 22.

Ba:rbo:m & AssociaWs

23

B~ . c~ar~ li D~ . B~ Bit~ ioza~_____

24

Atto.t:t:teys for Slll~o and Hernandez

[PROPQ5lRl OlUJF,B 2S

rI'lS SO ORDERED.

26

'2.7 DA'IBD:

_ ' 2005

, ,
28

9

 
 I

.

I
""./

- 'I~' ' ,. -.

NNA Y. PARK. SBN 164242

DE 1. NOH, SBN 192134

2 .S. EQUAL EMPLOYMENT

PPOR""TUNITY COMMISSION

3. 55 East Temple Street~4th Floor

os Angeles CA 9001 L.
4 . elephone: (213} 894-1082

Facsimile: (213) 894-1301

5
Attorn~eS..for. Plaintiff 6 .8. E VAL EMPLOYMENT

. PPOR . TY COMMISSION

7

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

8

CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
9 U.S.EQUALEMPLOMNT : ," l CASENO.: .ACV03-70 13'~

10 PPORTIJNlTY COl\1MlSSION,

..

.

COMPLAINT- CIVIL RIGHTS

11

EMPLOYMENT

.

Plaintiff,
12

D(4I2SuC.Rs.IcM. §IN§ A20T0I0Oe,Net. seq.)

v.
13

.nmv TRIAL DEMAND

~ ..
(Re.

14 'SHHO:ME APPLIANCES

0lRP.0RATION, AND DOES 1-10

15 nco USlVe,

.

16 t:7" I" 18: .

Defendants.

~ ". " r

. . '

,'.

.• . .. fJ Jl~;:::=~=;!;:~~::~~~:;~~~:~:~::::ec:;:C;~es
26' Erika Salgado ("Ms. Salgado") and Michelle Hernandeztvlvls. Hernandez") to
27 exual harassment. The Commissien further alleges that D~;Q.WI.1.1.tl:~t.ali.a1eJI1.w.......--h
28 gainst Ms. Salgado for resisting and/or complaining about the ~~J..bJ~~WLC:
OCT '- 2 2003

-'

• i.,: . .,

JURISDICTION AND VENUE

2

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

3 1331, 1337, 1343 and 1345.

4

2. This action is authorized and instituted pursuant to Section 706(t)(1)

5 nd (3) of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, as amended, 42 D.,S.C.

,

,

6 § 2000e-S(f)(I) and (3) ("Title VII") and Section 102 of the Civil Rights Act of

7 1991,42 U.S.C. § 1981a.

8

3. The employment practices alleged to be unlawful were and are now

9 being committed within the jurisdiction of the United States District Court for the

10 entra.1 District of California.

11

PARTIES

]2

4. Plaintiff, U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, is the

13 federal agency charged with the administration, interpretation and enforcement of

14 ' itle VII, and is expressly authorized to bring this action by Section 706(f)( 1) and

15 3) of Title VII, 42 U.S.C. § 2000e-5(f)(1) and (3).

]6

5. At all relevant times, Defendants have continuously been doing

17, ausiness in the -State of (;,aLiforQia" ap,¢ in'Los:Angele~': County. At all relevant

] 8 imes, Defendants havecontinuously employed fifteen (15) or more persons.

19

6. At all-relevant times, Defendants-have continuously engaged in an

. '"'," . . ;:/.:";;':,. 20) "~d:ustry'affecting commerce~ithin:the~:Ih,~ 'n~ iri.~,,'9.fSections701(b),' (g)and (h):of .: ", ,> ,
\it:;;~:,,! ~i1~~~I~~~~:~;';~\,'.;;,~~~i:"· ~~;~~:~i~;j;~i:';;~~::;lj,;\fz,t-,",.~.',:,-~'.:: ~.'

.. ", ':,2~\: ~:1:~;,,;:'" I':h~" '"' :",< :',r1r~~nt~f£.T$;'1~'of-~f:bfla~:,,'::::'~;:~hlfi¢siuid,:~cap~~iiies'oft>~feridants' .

." "

23 uedas DOES 1 through10, -~nch.isi've~::her~hi.'~d-theref6r.e Plaintiffsues said

24 . efendants by such,'fictitiotis:,nmne's. 'Plaiuiiff.,re:servBs the'right-to 'amend the

..

..

25" omplaint to name the DOE Defendants as they become known. Plaintiff alleges

26 hat each of the Defendants named as DOE 'Defendants was in some manner

27 esponsible for the acts and omissions alleged herein and Plaintiff will amend the

28 II

2

".

omplaint to allege such responsibility when same shall have been ascertained by

2 Plaintiff.

3

8. All of the acts and failures to act alleged herein were duly performed:

4 y and attributable to all Defendants, each acting as a successor, agent) employee

5 r under the direction and control ofthe others, except as otherwise specifically

6 lleged. Said acts and failures to act were within the scope of such agency and/or

7 mployrnent, and each Defendant participated in, approved and/or ratified the

8 nlawful acts and omissions by other Defendants complained of herein.

9 henever and wherever reference is made in this Complaint to any act by a

10 Defendant or Defendants, such allegations and reference shall also be deemed to

11 ean the acts and failures to act of each Defendant acting individually, j ointly,

12 d/or severally.

13

STATEMENT OF CLAIMS

14

9. More than thirty days prior to the institution of this lawsuit) Ms.

] 5 algado and Ms. Hernandez each filed a charge with the Commission alleging

16 iolations of Title VII by Defendants. The Commission investigated and issued a
17 . Letter ofDetermination finding:tha~' Ms. Sa'1g?+PQ.'wasl:lsClbi,e.et:edt o:unlawful sexual. .
of 18 .arassment and retaliation in violation Title VII. The Commission investigated

19 . d issued a Letter ofDetermination finding thatMs. Hernandez was subjected to

20; .exual harassment iii.violation',ofthJe, VlI.·All·donditions,prece·dent.to:,the.. . . .

: I. .. "
"f" 11'\: : ,: .. -. , .•,. r-c-..

I\ . ,. ". ;:" "d,'~i.;.·",:~ "i';,,t"tl.d,1:".:'.:...:':,-,.~.,."I,'~,'oI'¥.:i'i!.~";.~~~>t·~l.';;\,t.·v_·§tr':.:,;::y't~W·";-;. :~I;'~;.,&::R':m"t~i11J::l\~H':r(.,fr·:-i·i' ~,i"f.'t .\..d.~_?:~I;":·;,~ ";:''>i:"';'-r.'.('.,:~":,;·~;~,.~:j:-d)t'.'q~,:i:'::i,~'~~..~~;~,I I~';' ~;~:;':J,li{~:';·(~i':~~~.~~"~.~~':I~'!''1:.~ir':l'~;·.''~·I'~!,";,..,;)'.',,:r'-y:',;~;"i:·,:;::""/."".''.{:,!',;.~..•',.";::':.:,."."I'.·:,:I;..;'">~ '':.:'/';f'l::j ,~;':-<:::;''.'.1..:,7,:-:':.\..-:.~,:,.:::",:'.,':;,,_,:..:;,-~,

~':!:"; :::?·,,:,::::~~:,,}~::':i~;,·.~.·I;:~·~:~·:;;::;~~~::.:;':'<~':j~1.':~~fXii~.:,'~·;~~~:.~.·~;·.i~~Tt~~·;i:.:~;i!~i.~~i;;;g~~1@c~;;~~.\~r~i:~~;:'\t~;fr4ii.·,.i~I;:~~~:~~{f);1/~~·:~:X¢;~;'i~.:~':::.~:~i;:.~'li~,;':~:;?;:iS!;i~\.:;I~'~ ,t~.:;>!1;j};::i.~):::/ ,

'. . '.: ·22~.::· .,.: . :'1 0,..: ·':';1·.shj¢.e:jnr(jt:ap'e'~t'.~t:Je·~st.~:000~')4)'~:te~t~~~S[~#a~~';~rtgage(nh:~illilawful"

'., ,": ..

.

.

23' mploymentpractices'atits'Los .Angeles, Ci:ilifornla Ibcatio'n-;:hi violation of .

24' ection 703.(a}'ofritle VII, 42U.S.C. §,2000e,2(&)(l) bY'subj:e'cti1Jg Ms.Balgado...

25 d Ms. Hernandez.to sexual harassment. The sexual harassment Ms. Salgado and

26 Ms. Hernandez were subjected to included, but was not limited to, unwelcome

27 hysical touching, and sexually charged and/or suggestive, speech and/or conduct,

28 nd requests for dates and other unwanted social interaction.

3

"

] ] . When Ms. Salgado rebuked and/or complained about the sexual 2 arassment, Defendants subjected her to unwarranted discipline and terminated 3 er, resulting in a tangible employment action. Defendants also failed to take

4 immediate and effeotive corrective action to prevent the harassment despite 5 epeated complaints from Ms. Salgado and Ms. Hernandez about sexual 6 arassment,

7

12. The effect of the practicers) complained of in paragraphs 10 and 11

8 bove has been to deprive Ms. Salgado and Ms. Hernandez of equal employment

9 pportunities and otherwise adversely affect their status as employees, because of

10 heir sex.

11

13. Since in or about at least 2000, Defendants have engaged in unlawful

12 mployment practices at its Los Angeles, California location, in violation of

13 ection 704(a) of Title VIt 42 U.S.C. § 2000e-3(a) by subjecting Ms. Salgado to

14 .etaliation for complaining about sexual harassment. The retaliation against Ms.

15 algado included, but was not limited to, unwarranted discipline, reprimands, and

16 ermination,

1T . 14. The effect ofthe practicescomplainedof above .i.n·parag;r.ap'h~ 13' has

18 een to deprive Ms. Salgado of equal employment opportunities and ttl otherwise

19' dversely affect her employment statusbecause she engagedin activityprotected '

'.". .'.;.',':;:',r,o.; .:.~ ';,.~?:'' :d~~:~i~l~ :VI~.:, :'~;;:':";',;~j"'I;:':' :·,i-,!·.·;·;~:·."':,·:::·~·. ;1<;:':\'';~'!~;j/;'.~\i~.';:1' ·;:.;~ ;.':;.'!':i/',.~:~:·,:,:;:>: t'B"'''f'f'".".).,. .,.:.; .,",",,,,,,.:",~:.;.i

·,1'·

ti· .• ., f, ', ..,

.'

,

,',' - ,.. ',. '''.'

,.:.,

~~..r.,

'1", .....,.",.;r \

Hi,:,':>':' :;,. :':',' ...",·,:·tY. f~'·l,r I·"w~":,;···~l ..,:i.:~·""1~111il~\ r"'l"~"l,.l1':&.•a "':~it.},",,,,~lJ '.,.,

... X:"""''ill''}' 'I'~·iI:·,::,.,:.:·,..;:":."':';..

: .. :':2W' lrrouglr 14·abbve wete'1ntentlOn.al:'· ':.>~:::'.:' -:"'.: -.-. ·!: ...:.:·/,I;· :';::." :' .... ,.... , .", .',,'.:.::I~:-::.,. "",.;:...,:.. ,,! "~"

23

16. The unhtwfui'employmentpnl¢tices:comptained:6firi:paragt~phs It>

:' . 2"4:·:· ough J4 above were.donewithmaliee or withreckless "in"d:lffer~nce .tb·':th·e

25 ederally protected rights of Ms. Salgado and Ms. Hernandez.

26

17. As a direct and 'proximate result of the aforesaid acts of Defendants)

27 s, Salgado and Ms. Hernandez have each suffered emotional pain, SUffering,

28

•...... -

4

I

'.

."

"

1 inconvenience, loss of enjoyment of life, humiliation and damages, according to

2 roof.

3

] 8. As a direct and proximate result of the aforesaid acts of Defendants,

4 Ms. Salgado suffered a loss of earnings in an amount according to proof.

S

PMYER FOR RELIEF

6

Wherefore, the Commission respectfully requests that this Court:

7

A. Grant a permanent injunction enjoining Defendants, their respective

8 fficers, successors, assigns, agents, and all persons in active concert or

g. articipation with them, from engaging in any employment practice which

10 iscriminates on the basis of sex;

11

B. Grant a pennanent injunction enjoining Defendants, their respective

12 fficers, successors, assigns, agents, and all persons in active concert or

-

,

13 participation with them, from retaliating against any employee who opposes

14 iscrimination or engages in any protected activity under Title VII; i

15

C. Order Defendants to institute and carry out policies, practices, and

16 rograms which provide equal employment opportunities for women, and which

·IT. radieatetheeffects of its past andpresent unlawful.~plo.yme'llt~p,~eti~es;' .".'...

,\'

..

'..
,

.,.

.

18 .

D. Order Defendants to make whole Ms. Salgado, by providing

19 ppropriate backpay with prejudgment interest, and frontpayin amountstobe

.' . 26· :~tenniiae&at,.tiial; and/or other affinhi;ltive r¢liefnec~s~,aiy· to.,:eta4i£at.¢':tJ.):~:,~~ffe.C1f~·,:~··,.,··:· ;r·.· ."

;': ::II·.r~r:(.~;·:':'~.;''::'"~":}.,. ':"-:-'.-t,.9;~'.r~~'~,i,~~~~': " , --:"'.'/~'"~1t';l::.'.1,r:;!:'l~::~h·.h"·~I,.i,~r:>~. ~~·,1..,b~.:.",~;.:. 'l~: e·:·.m.'·;·;.:':.·:~•~.''I:.:l.~.~.~'W.i'~~.,·,+'':,'~~~ I~·'·.:a.,~,'I:,"~" ~·,~··~··;~,:~~·~:I,;· ~.::::.~~,~~; .;t;,:'.''.:::~'-'::~,.~;~.~·:I·,.'.I.,.r."',~],·,:.;..~~f."..;',~~!\·:·'~...~.:~,.~:·:·J.i,..~;·~M!.,::I::\,~t~~.i:~:'.~~~,;:r,;~;l~.\;...~,~r~~:.~•~.~,:,':.::~;~·~~id~l"r~i·t~:.~~·l~'~~'!(:~. ~'~\r?.~~~ItN/'~RJr;~~~.~r:r'{:J;.:~::~:::·:{-~,':I.~L:;',t{·."~'··.·~..1I~;t\;~~cril;.\= {,~1{~~t.'1;~.,~j~i.t.~~:tj~:\~}~f,..''~P~§iJ~~·\I~'~\b.~~

::..... :":':2~' ,::.:: ····'::·:.E~·· '" .'Order Defetid"ants:to·irtake.whole:Ms·. S41g~~p~Il;Wi4:~ ,.··.$'r '.,·.ittf~ij~t'·':':' .:.:';. -:;:."'.:': :j:.,:''''< .. c:I.:.,..!I;.~·.;~~.~";'.h':..ri1~.:.,:.;1~~r',,~.{~'·b.':~,:.I;'':.,;i<'-'.),t'.!tr.l~,;~.i~.h:"i:r!:.~·:

,,,,_., ,~.,r'"~

:T..~""r"~-I.r~\+:1.' ;~"I,.II.,I.:~·r~:~«~t.~:~" i'.i'~.:1,\.!..~r''..:,L~1.,I.:...r...!'.!,•~d....,....1

f!'!'. ;~"t/J~~)ojI'rt;t~r!!r"'·1

I .,: " :. r .",,

I •• - ".: I ;. '·.1 .-:.•.

.'.'"

..

, , ' .:..... '., '.. :

.',1~-;;•..•~•~~•.:~'~. ~/~~.·, ~'•"!".':."-'.?,'~.t::;:~:~•,"• ";t:r.:-~Tr~··' ".

...:..:..~..~:r.::..~'.~".:'r'...,'.

,::.~r:":::'!,".,'-.:;:·~:.:,~:~:,\~I".''.~·I':I:'.:"·\.'
': ,. '.. .":.:' ,.. II:

''.!.'v1.I,'..":~,~:·.',:.:,'~.~';,~\;r:,r,!r'~,·r'.,\··~I'l···i~'··f'r1''\l.·.I'"J"~!..\,',;:~"",I;'':l"·~~I"r('·t~~l~:;l''.k'

~I.~~:,I)r'l'...•·r~r!Yi,·.'~L~~I~..t!,"~1.·~I"f~~\'[~~:::I.I~~:l;':-l;:1-r-':.~~:~."".\f;.,~~,,,~;rI~l!.~;,''~":!;~!.~":~!~ ~..~.r~.,.:I..".~~~.~~:..II l~':rif!.ri~n:~Yh·i~.~~(~\,'~.~.1f't.~T'!'i~"~"-}"'[~fI:-:I'}.",·.~":,"~;V:\~:-~~:I~~:
-l(

23· hole by' providing compensation-forpast and'fut~re non;;.pe¢uhi~ Iesses .:: .

.

.

.'. 2<4".: .·:~$\dting·, frOlJ1 the unlawful practices, complained ofinp~.agraphs'19-·wough1-4 .-'.' r·,

..

..

. ' , '.

-. "

25· bove, including, but not limited to emotional pain, suffering, inconvenience, loss

26 . f enjoyment of life, and humiliation, in amounts to be determined at trial.

27

28

5

I•

I

~'

)

F. Order Defendants to pay Ms. Salgado and Ms. Hernandez punitive

•..., .

2 arnages for its malicious and reckless conduct described in paragraphs 10 through

3 14 above, in amounts to be determined at trial.

4

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

5 he public interest.

6

H. Award the Commission its costs of this action.

7

JURy TRIAL DElVlAND

8

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

9 omplaint.

IODated:

September 29, 2003

Respectfully Submitted,

11

ERIC S. DREIBAND

General Counsel

12

JAMES LEE

13

Deputy General Counsel

14

GWENDOLYN YOUNG REAMS

Associate General Counsel

15

U.S. EQUAL El\.1PLOYMENT

16

OPPOR"TUNITY COMMISSION

1801 "L" Street, N.W.

17 "

Washingtoh~D~C. 20507

18

·19

BY:'-~"c-v-I~~~"""""----

23 '

25"5 ·East TethI!.le. Street,4th Floor

Los Angeles, CA. 90012 .

,24.

25

26

27

28

6

 
 CM/ECF - California Central District - Docket Report

https://ecf.cacd.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/DktRpt.pl?450495481604215-L_3...
CLOSED, CONMAG

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT, CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA (Western Division - Los Angeles)
CIVIL DOCKET FOR CASE #: 2:03-cv-07013-MAN

USEEOC v. BSH Home Appliances, et al Assigned to: Magistrate Judge Margaret A. Nagle Demand: $0 Cause: 42:2000e Job Discrimination (Employment)

Date Filed: 09/30/2003 Date Terminated: 03/03/2005 Jury Demand: Plaintiff Nature of Suit: 442 Civil Rights: Jobs Jurisdiction: U.S. Government Plaintiff

Plaintiff
U S Equal Employment Opportunity Commission

represented by Anna Y Park US Equal Employment Opportunity Commission Los Angeles District Office 255 E Temple St, 4th Floor Los Angeles, CA 90012 213-894-1000 Email: anna.park@eeoc.gov LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

Sue J Noh US Equal Employment Opportunity Commission Los Angeles District Office 255 E Temple St, 4th Fl Los Angeles, CA 90012 213-894-1000 Fax: 213-894-1301 LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

Intervenor Plaintiff Erika Salgado

represented by Carla D Barboza Barboza & Associates 660 South Figueroa St, Ste 1620 Los Angeles, CA 90017-3453 213-629-4745 LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

Intervenor Plaintiff Michelle Hernandez

represented by Carla D Barboza (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

1 of 7

7/30/2007 1:57 PM

CM/ECF - California Central District - Docket Report
V. Defendant BSH Home Appliances Corporation
Defendant Does 1-10, Inclusive
2 of 7

https://ecf.cacd.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/DktRpt.pl?450495481604215-L_3...
represented by Ellen Stuart Thompson and Alessio 2550 5th Ave, Ste 518 San Diego, CA 92103 619-233-9100 LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
Jackie V Iannicelli Connelly Sheehan & Moran 150 S Wacker Dr Ste 1600 Chicago, IL 60606 312-372-1969 LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
Michael James Sheehan Connelly Sheehan & Moran 150 S Wacker Dr Ste 1600 Chicago, IL 60606 312-372-1969 LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
Rachel B Cowen Connelly Sheehan Moran 150 South Wacker Drive, Suite 1600 Chicago, IL 60606 312-372-1969 Email: rcowen@csm-law.com LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
Robert A Waller, Jr Robert A Waller Jr Law Offices 2235 Encinitas Blvd, Ste 212 Encinitas, CA 92024 760-753-3118 Fax: 760-753-3206 TERMINATED: 01/21/2004 LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
7/30/2007 1:57 PM

CM/ECF - California Central District - Docket Report

https://ecf.cacd.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/DktRpt.pl?450495481604215-L_3...

Date Filed 09/30/2003 09/30/2003 10/22/2003 12/03/2003 12/03/2003 12/04/2003
12/08/2003
12/08/2003
12/10/2003 01/02/2004 01/16/2004 01/21/2004 01/21/2004 01/22/2004 01/22/2004

#

Docket Text

1 COMPLAINT filed Summons(es) 20 days issued referred to Discovery Rosalyn M. Chapman (rrey) (Entered: 10/02/2003)
2 CERTIFICATION AS TO INTERESTED PARTIES filed by plaintiff USEEOC (rrey) (Entered: 10/02/2003)
3 NOTICE AND WAIVER OF SERVICE of SUMMONS by defendant BSH Home Appliances sent by plf on 10/3/03 by Jackie V Ianicell, attorney (lc) (Entered: 10/23/2003)
5 DISCLOSURE STATEMENT by DSH Home Appliances (lc) (Entered: 12/05/2003)
6 ANSWER filed by defendant BSH Home Appliances Corporation to complaint [1-1] (lc) (Entered: 12/05/2003)
4 NOTICE OF DISCREPANCY AND ORDER by Judge Terry J. Hatter ordering answer, disclosure statement submitted received on 12/3/03 to be fld and processed; fld date to be the date the doc was stamped "received but not fld" w/the Clerk (lc) (Entered: 12/04/2003)
7 APPLICATION AND ORDER of Non-Resident Attorney to Appear in a Specific Case filed for defendant BSH Home Appliances by Jackie V Iannicelli. Designating Robert A Waller Jr as local counsel. Approved by Judge Terry J. Hatter.(Fee pd) (lc) (Entered: 12/10/2003)
8 APPLICATION AND ORDER of Non-Resident Attorney to Appear in a Specific Case filed for defendant BSH Home Appliances by Michael James Sheehan. Designating Robert A Waller Jr as local counsel. Approved by Judge Terry J. Hatter.(Fee pd) (lc) (Entered: 12/10/2003)
9 CERTIFICATION OF INTERESTED PARTIES filed by defendant BSH Home Appliances (lc) (Entered: 12/11/2003)
16 INTERVENOR COMPLAINT against intervenor defendants BSH Home Appliances Corporation, Does 1-10, filed by plaintiffs intervention Erika Salgado, Michelle Hernandez. JURY DEMAND(lc, ) (Entered: 02/03/2004)
11 JOINT Exhibit List filed by BSH Home Appliances Corporation, U S Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (lc, ) (Entered: 01/22/2004)
10 Substitution of Attorney filed. Substituting attorney Ellen DeVoe Stuart for BSH Home Appliances Corporation in place and stead of attorney Robert A Waller by Judge Terry J. Hatter Jr. (lc, ) (Entered: 01/22/2004)
13 PROOF OF SERVICE filed by Defendant, BSH Home Appliances Corporation of 10 Substitution of Attorney (Form G-1), served on 1/16/04 upon Anna Y Park by US mail. (shb, ) (Entered: 01/27/2004)
FAX number for Attorney Ellen DeVoe Stuart is 629-233-9400. (lc, ) (Entered: 01/22/2004)
12 NOTICE OF CLERICAL ERROR Re: Joint Exhibit List[11] erroneously docketed on CV 03-7013 TJH USEEOC vs BSH should have been on CV 03-2268 TJH, Hendrickson vs Amazon.com, original removed and correctly docketed (lc, ) (Entered:

3 of 7

7/30/2007 1:57 PM

CM/ECF - California Central District - Docket Report

https://ecf.cacd.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/DktRpt.pl?450495481604215-L_3...

01/22/2004 01/29/2004 01/30/2004 01/30/2004
02/02/2004 02/02/2004 02/03/2004 02/03/2004
02/17/2004 02/25/2004 02/25/2004 05/06/2004 06/02/2004 06/02/2004 07/07/2004

01/22/2004)
14 JOINT REPORT Rule 26(f) Discovery Plan filed; estimated length of trial 14 days. (jag, ) (Entered: 01/28/2004)
17 CERTIFICATION AS TO Interested Parties filed by Intervenor Plaintiffs Michelle Hernandez, Erika Salgado. (ca, ) (Entered: 02/05/2004)
20 STIPULATION for Filing of First Amended Complaint filed by Plaintiff U S Equal Employment Opportunity Commission. Lodged Proposed Order and First Amended Complaint. (ir, ) (Entered: 02/07/2004)
21 PROOF OF SERVICE filed by Plaintiff U S Equal Employment Opportunity Commission regarding [20] Stipulation for filingof First Amended Complaint, First Amended Complaint and Proposed Order regarding Stipulation for Filing of First Amended complaint was served on 1/30/04. (ir, ) (Entered: 02/07/2004)
15 STIPULATION AND ORDER by Judge Terry J. Hatter Jr: Michelle Hernandez and Erika Salgado may fiel a complaint in intervention(lc, ) (Entered: 02/03/2004)
FAX number for Attorney Carla D Barbosa is 213-629-5302. (lc, ) (Entered: 02/03/2004)
18 STIPULATION AND ORDER by Judge Terry J. Hatter Jr granting leave to file amended complaint[1] and defendant BSH Home Appliance shall not be required to answer the amendment.(lc, ) (Entered: 02/05/2004)
19 FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT against defendant BSH Home Appliances Corporation, Does 1-10 amending Complaint - (Discovery)[1] ; JURY DEMAND,filed by plaintiff U S Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (lc, ) (Entered: 02/05/2004)
22 ANSWER to Intervenor Complaint[16] filed by defendants BSH Home Appliances Corporation.(lc, ) (Entered: 03/01/2004)
23 DISCLOSURE of pursuant to FRCP 7.1 filed by Defendant BSH Home Appliances Corporation (lc, ) (Entered: 03/05/2004)
24 PROOF OF SERVICE filed by defendant BSH Home Appliances Corporation of[22] Answer to Intervenor Complaint, was served on 2/16/04 by mail. (lc, ) (Entered: 03/05/2004)
25 ORDER by Judge Terry J. Hatter Jr: all discovery at issue are referred to Magistrate Judge Rosalyn M Chapman; Final Pretrial Conference set for 11/29/2004 10:00 AM before Honorable Terry J. Hatter Jr.(lc, ) (Entered: 05/07/2004)
26 SETTLEMENT PROCEDURE SELECTION: NOTICE, REQUEST AND ORDER by Judge Terry J. Hatter Jr. Parties shall appear before Magistrate Judge Margaret A Nagel for settlement proceedings.(ir, ) (Entered: 06/03/2004)
27 NOTICE OF REFERRAL OF MATTER to the Magistrate Judge. settlement procedure selection26 is referred to Magistrate Judge Margaret A. Nagle for for ruling and processing. (lc, ) (Entered: 06/08/2004)
28 NOTICE OF MOTION AND MOTION to Compel responses to EEOC first and second requests for inspection and copying of documents filed by plaintiff U S Equal Employment Opportunity Commission. Motion set for hearing on 7/28/2004 at 09:30 AM before Magistrate Rosalyn M. Chapman. (pj, ) (Entered: 07/13/2004)

4 of 7

7/30/2007 1:57 PM

CM/ECF - California Central District - Docket Report

https://ecf.cacd.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/DktRpt.pl?450495481604215-L_3...

07/07/2004 07/13/2004 07/21/2004 07/21/2004 07/22/2004 07/23/2004 07/23/2004 07/23/2004 07/26/2004 07/26/2004 07/28/2004
07/28/2004 07/28/2004

29 JOINT STIPULATION re MOTION to Compel responses to EEOC first and second requests for inspection and copying of documents [28] filed by Plaintiff U S Equal Employment Opportunity Commission. (pj, ) (Entered: 07/13/2004)
30 SUPPLEMENTAL MEMORANDUM in Support of MOTION to Compel responses to EEOC first and second requests for inspection and copying of documents [28] filed by plaintiff U S Equal Employment Opportunity Commission. (lc, ) (Entered: 07/14/2004)
31 SUPPLEMENTAL MEMORANDUM in Support of MOTION to Compel[28] filed by defendant BSH Home Appliances Corporation. (lc, ) (Entered: 07/22/2004)
32 REQUEST to Strike BSH supplemental brief regarding EEOC MOTION to Compel[28] filed by plaintiff U S Equal Employment Opportunity Commission. (lc, ) (Entered: 07/22/2004)
33 STIPULATION AND ORDER by Judge Rosalyn M. Chapman : Hearing on plaintiffs MOTION to Compel discovery responses to EEOC first and second request for inspection and copying of documents is continued to 8/4/2004 at 09:30 AM [28]. (lc, ) (Entered: 07/23/2004)
34 EX PARTE APPLICATION to Continue hearing on motion to compel discovery responses filed by defendant BSH Home Appliances Corporation. Lodged order. (lc, ) Modified on 7/27/2004 (lc, ). (Entered: 07/27/2004)
35 DECLARATION of Ellen D Stuart in support of EX PARTE APPLICATION to Continue hearing on motion to compel discovery responses[34] filed by defendant BSH Home Appliances Corporation. (lc, ) (Entered: 07/27/2004)
36 PROOF OF SERVICE filed by defendant BSH Home Appliances Corporation. re [34] EX PARTE APPLICATION to Continue hearing on motion to compel discovery responses, [35] Declaration (Motion related), was served on 7/23/04 by mail. (lc, ) (Entered: 07/27/2004)
37 ORDER by Judge Rosalyn M. Chapman : denying as moot [34] plaintiffs Ex Parte Application to Continue hearing on motion to compel; see 7/22/04 order; denied on merits as to the remainder (lc, ) (Entered: 07/28/2004)
39 OPPOSITION to EX PARTE APPLICATION to Continue hearing on motion to compel discovery responses[34] filed by plaintiff U S Equal Employment Opportunity Commission. (lc, ) (Entered: 07/30/2004)
38 ORDER by Judge Rosalyn M. Chapman : the documents listed below were improperly filed for the following reasons: It is untimely. Local Rule 37-2.3; therefore, the following document(s) shall be stricken from the record and shall not be considered by the Court: Memorandum in Support of Motion[31].(dts, ) (Entered: 07/28/2004)
40 NOTICE OF MOTION AND MOTION to Compel Deposition of BSH management employee witnesses filed by plaintiff U S Equal Employment Opportunity Commission. Motion set for hearing on 8/18/2004 at 09:30 AM before Magistrate Rosalyn M. Chapman. (lc, ) (Entered: 08/02/2004)
41 JOINT STIPULATION for motion to compel BSH management employee witnesses filed by plaintiff U S Equal Employment Opportunity Commission. (lc, ) (Entered: 08/02/2004)

5 of 7

7/30/2007 1:57 PM

CM/ECF - California Central District - Docket Report

https://ecf.cacd.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/DktRpt.pl?450495481604215-L_3...

08/04/2004
08/10/2004 08/10/2004 08/20/2004 08/20/2004 08/27/2004 08/27/2004 09/03/2004 09/03/2004 09/08/2004 09/20/2004 10/04/2004

42 MINUTES (IN CHAMBERS) (1) ORDER GRANTING, IN PART, AND DENYING, IN PART, PLAINTIFF EEOC'S MOTION TO COMPEL RESPONSES TO FIRST AND SECOND SETS OF REQUESTS FOR INSPECTION AND COPYING OF DOCUMENTS; AND (2) ORDER SETTING DEPOSITION SCHEDULE by Judge Rosalyn M. Chapman : (see order for complete details) granting in part and denying in part [28] Motion to Compel, granting [40] Motion to Compel Deposition (dts, ) (Entered: 08/06/2004)
43 MINUTES OF In Chambers - Order by Judge Margaret A. Nagle setting a : Settlement Conference in this matter for 8/27/2004 10:00 AM before Magistrate Judge Margaret A. Nagle. Confidential Settlement Conference Statements are due by 8/20/04. (ec, ) (Entered: 08/10/2004)
44 APPLICATION AND ORDER of Non-Resident Attorney to Appear in a Specific Case by Rachel B Cowen for BSH Home Appliances Corporation, designating Ellen Stuart McLane as local counsel. Fee paid. Approved by Judge Terry J. Hatter Jr.(lc, ) (Entered: 08/11/2004)
45 MOTION and MEMORANDUM to Overrule the Magistrate's Order granting EEOC's motion to compel filed by Defendant BSH Home Appliances Corporation. Motion taken under submission on 9/20/2004 before Honorable Terry J. Hatter Jr. (shb, ) (Entered: 08/25/2004)
46 NOTICE OF MOTION to Overrule the Magistrate's Order granting EEOC's motion to compel[45] filed by Defendant BSH Home Appliances Corporation. (shb, ) (Entered: 08/25/2004)
47 MINUTES (In Chambers) by Judge Margaret A. Nagle: Settlement Conference is continued from 8/27/04 to 9/8/2004 09:30 AM before Magistrate Judge Margaret A. Nagle. (ib, ) (Entered: 08/30/2004)
48 ORDER AND JOINT STIPULATION MODIFYING ORDER SETTING DEPOSITION SCHEDULE by Judge Rosalyn M. Chapman: The deposition of Charlene Brown is continued from 9/7/04 to 9/10/04 and the deposition of Jan Mackay is continued from 9/8/04 to 9/20/04.(mch, ) (Entered: 09/02/2004)
49 OPPOSITION to BSH Motion and Memorandum to overrule the Magistrate Order granting EEOC motion to compel [45] filed by Plaintiff U S Equal Employment Opportunity Commission. (ir ) (Entered: 09/08/2004)
50 DECLARATION of Sue J Noh regarding Concurrently filed EEOC Opposition to BSH Motion and Memorandum to overrule the Magistrates order granting EEOC Motion to compel [45] filed by Plaintiff U S Equal Employment Opportunity Commission. (ir ) (Entered: 09/08/2004)
51 MINUTES OF Settlement Conference held before Judge Margaret A. Nagle. A settlement in principal has been reached between the parties.Tape #: 04-49. (ec, ) (Entered: 09/20/2004)
52 STIPULATION AND ORDER by Judge Terry J. Hatter Jr : Discovery is stayed 10 days during which parties wil work to finalize settlement through consent decree 51.(lc, ) (Entered: 09/21/2004)
53 ORDER AND JOINT STIPULATION FOR A FURTHER STAY OF DISCOVERY by Judge Terry J. Hatter Jr: Additional ten day stay on discovery during which the parties will work to finalize the settlement through the Consent Decree.(ir, ) (Entered: 10/05/2004)

6 of 7

7/30/2007 1:57 PM

CM/ECF - California Central District - Docket Report

https://ecf.cacd.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/DktRpt.pl?450495481604215-L_3...

10/14/2004 11/23/2004
02/17/2005
03/03/2005 03/03/2005

54 ORDER AND JOINT STIPULATION by Judge Terry J. Hatter Jr: An Additional ten days stay on discovery during which the parties will work to finalize the settlement through the Consent Decree.(ir, ) (Entered: 10/15/2004)
55 MINUTES OF In Chambers Conference held before Judge Terry J. Hatter Jr: The Court has been informed that this case has settled, therefore, the Final Pretrial Conference hearing previously set for 11/29/04 at 10:00am will be taken off calendar, pending the proposed consent decree to follow. No appearance is necessary. Court Reporter: not reported. (rl, ) (Entered: 11/24/2004)
56 CONSENT TO PROCEED before Magistrate Judge, ALL PARTIES having consented in accordance with Title 28 Section 636(c) and F.R.CIV.P. 73(b) filed Jointly, signed by Judge Terry J. Hatter Jr. Case reassigned to Magistrate Judge Margaret A. Nagle for final disposition. Any appeal shall be taken before the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals. (pbap, ) (Entered: 02/22/2005)
57 CONSENT DECREE by Judge Margaret A. Nagle: IT IS SO ORDERED. (dw, ) (Entered: 03/04/2005)
(Made JS-6. Case Terminated.) (dw, ) (Entered: 03/04/2005)

PACER Login:
Description:
Billable Pages:

PACER Service Center
Transaction Receipt
07/30/2007 11:55:47

hs0328

Client Code: eeoc

Docket Report

Search Criteria:

2:03-cv-07013-MAN

4

Cost:

0.32

7 of 7

7/30/2007 1:57 PM