IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA

EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY COMMISSION,
Plaintiff, v. MAIN LINE HEALTH, INC.
Defendant.

)

)

)

)

)

CNIL ACTION NO.

)

)

)

COMPLAINT

)

JURY TRIAL DEMANDED

)

)

)

NATURE OF THE ACTION

This is an action under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, Title I of the Civil Rights Act of 1991 and the Age Discrimination in Employment Act to correct unlawful employment practices on the bases of race (black) and age, and to provide appropriate relief to Charging Parties Lorestine Pressley and Diann King, who were adversely affected by such practices. As articulated with greater particularity in paragraph 12 below, the Commission alleges that Ms. Pressley, age 53, and Ms. King, age 50, both of whom are black, applied for transfer and promotion into the position of Lead Accounts Receivable Representative, a supervisory position for which they were both well qualified. Although the Charging Parties were interviewed for the promotion, Defendant selected a 28-year-old white applicant, who did not meet the Defendant's stated requirements for the position. As a result of the Defendant's discriminatory denial of the promotion, Ms. Pressley and Ms. King, suffered backpay losses and emotional distress damages.

JURISDICTION AND VENUE 1. Jurisdiction of this Court is invoked pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §§ 451, 1331, 1337, 1343 and 1345. This action is authorized and iustituted pursuant to § 706(1) (I) and (3) of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, as amended, 42 U.S.C. § 20000-5(1)(1) aud (3)" (''Title VII'') and Section 102 of the Civil Rights Act of1991, 42 U.S.c. § 1981A. 2. Jurisdiction of this Court is also invoked pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §§ 451, 1331, 1337, 1343 and 1345. This action is authorized and instituted pursuant to Section 7(b) of the Age Discrimination in Employment Act of 1967, as amended, 29 U.S.C. § 626(b) (the "ADEA''), which incorporates by reference Sections 16(c) and 17 of the Fair Labor Standards Act of 1938 (the "FSLA"), as amended, 29 U.S.C. §§ 216(c) and 217. 3. The employment practices alleged to be unlawful were and are now being committed within the jurisdiction of the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania.
PARTIES 4. Plaintiff, the Equal Employment Opportuoity Commission (the "Commission''), is the agency of the United States of America charged with the administration, interpretation and enforcement of Title VII, and is expressly authorized to bring this action by Section 706(f)(1) and (3) ofTitle VII, 42 U.S.C. § 2000(e)-5(1) (I) and (3). 5. At all relevant times, Defendant Employer, Main Line Health, Inc. has continuously been and is now a Pennsylvania Corporation doing business in the State of Pennsylvania, and the Town of Wynnewood, and has continuously had at least fifteen (15) employees. 6. At all relevant times, Defendant Employer has also continuously been an employer
2

engaged in an industry affecting conunerce within the meaning of Sections 701(b), (g) and (h) of Title VII, 42 U.S.C. §§ 2000e(b), (g) and (h).
7. Plaintiff, the Equal Employment Opportunity Comntission, (the "Conunission'), is the agency of the United States of America charged with the administration, interpretation and enforcement of the ADEA and is expressly authorized to bring this action by Section 7(b) of the ADEA, 29 U.S.C. § 626(b), as amended by Section 2 of Reorganization Plan No. I of 1978, 92 Stat. 3781, and by Public Law 98-532 (1984), 98 Stat. 2705.
8. At all relevant times, Defendant Employer, Main Line Health, Inc. has continuously been and is now a Pennsylvania Corporation doing business in the State of Pennsylvania, and the Town of Wynnewood, and has continuously had at least twenty (20) employees.
9. At all relevant times, Defendant Employer has continuously been an employer engaged in an industry affecting conunerce within the meaning of Sections I I (b), (g) and (h) of the ADEA, 29 U.S.C. §§ 630(b), (g) and (h).
CONCILIATION
10. Prior to the institution of this lawsuit, the Commission's representatives attempted to eliminate the unlawful employment practices alleged below and to effect voluntary compliance with the ADEA through informal methods of conciliation, conference and persuasion within the
meaning of Section 7(b) ofthe ADEA, 29 U.S.c. § 626(b). STATEMENT OF CLAIMS
II. More than thirty days prior to the institntion of this lawsuit, Charging Parties Lorestine Pressley and Diann King filed charges of discrimination with the Commission alleging
violations of Title vn and the ADEA by Defendant Employer. All conditions precedent to the
3

institution of this lawsuit have been fulfilled. 12. Since at least August 2004, Defendant Employer has engaged unlawful
employment practices at its Wynnewood, Penusylvania facility in violation of Section 703(a)(I) of Title VII, 42 U.S.C. § 2000e-2(a) (I), and in violation of Section 4(a)(I) of the ADEA, 29 U.S.C. § 623 (a)(I), by failiug to promote Charging Parties Pressley and King to the position of Lead Accounts Receivable Representative, while selecting a less qualified younger white employee. The W11awful employment practices include, but are not limited to, the following:
(a) Charging Party Lorestine Pressley, who is black, applied at the age of 53 for transfer/promotion into the position of Lead Accounts Receivable Representative on May 5, 2004 and was interviewed on July 19, 2004. At that time, Ms. Pressley had earned an Associates' Degree in Business Administration from the Wharton School of Business' Evening Program, possessed over 20 years of experience in accounts receivable and billing in healthcare settings, and had been employed by Defendant as an Accounts Receivable Representative since 1995.She earned effective ratings in all of her perfonnance evaluations.
(b) Charging Party Diarm King, who is black, applied at the age of 50 for transfer/promotion into the position of Lead Accounts Receivable Representative on June 19, 2004 and was interviewed on July 19, 2004. At that time, Ms. King had thirteen years of experience in accounts receivable and billing, had developed proficiency in computer skills and third party billing, and had been employed by Defendant as an Accounts Receivable Representative since February 2000. She earned effective ratings in all of her perfonnance evaluations.
(c) In addition to the qualifications described above, both Ms. Pressley and Ms. King had supervisory experience in medical billing that enhanced their qualifications for Lead Accounts
4

Receivable position. Ms. Pressley had 13 years as a supervisor of outpatient billing at Jefferson University Hospital, and Ms. King had three years of experience as a physician billing supervisor for Presbyterian Medical Center.
(d) On August 25, 2004, Charging Parties Pressley and King learned through a departmental e-mail that Colleen Ward, who was 28 years of age at that time and is white, was selected for the Lead Accounts Receivable Position.
(e) At the time of her selection for the lead position, Ms. Ward had been employed by Defendant for seven months as an Accounts Receivable Billing Clerk, with her previous job experience only as a waitress and bartender.
(f) Defendant's stated job requirements for the position of Lead Accounts Receivable Representative required the following: Business studies/accounting experience preferred with 3-5 years billing/follow-up experience required; 3 years AIR experience.
(g) Ms. Ward, who is white and was 28 years of age when selected for the lead position, did not meet Defendant's stated job requirement of3-5 years experience in billing and follow up and 3 years of experience with accounts receivables.
(h) Both Charging Parties, who are black and over the age of 50, had extensive experience in the required work area& and had worked in Defendant's own Accounts Receivable Department for nine and four years, respectively.
(i) Ms. Pressley, Ms. King, and Ms. Ward were the only applicants for the Lead Accounts Receivable Position.
13. The effect of the practices complained of in paragraph 12, above, has been to deprive Lorestine Pressley and Diann King of equal employment opportunities and otherwise adversely affect their status as employees because of their race, black and age, over 40.
5

14. The unlawful employment practices complained of in paragraph 12, above. were intentional.
15. The W11awful employment practices complained of in paragraph 12, above, were done with malice or with reckless indifference to the federally protected rights of Lorestine Pressley and Diann King.
16. The unlawful employment practices complained of in paragraph 12, above, were and are willful within the meaning of Section 7(b) of the ADEA, 29 U.S.C. § 626(b).
PRAYER FOR RELIEF Wherefore, the Commission respectfully requests that this Court: A. Grant a permanent injunction enjoining Defendant Employer, its officers, successors, assigns, and all persons in active concert or participation with it, from engaging in any employment practice which discriminates on the basis ofrace or on the basis of age (over 40). B. Order Defendant Employer to institute and carry out policies and practices which effectively prohibit race discrimination in the work place, which provide equal employment opportunities for individuals 40 years of age and older, and which eradicate the effects of its past and present unlawful employment practices C. Order Defendant Employer to make Ms. Pressley and Ms. King whole by providing appropriate backpay with prejudgment interest, where applicable, in amounts to be determined at trial, an equal sum as liquidated damages, prejudgment interest, and other affinnative relief necessary to eradicate the effects of its unlawful employment practices, including but not limited to promotion or frontpay only if promotion is not feasible. D. Order Defendant Employer to make whole Ms. Pressley and Ms. King by providing compensation for past and future pecuniary losses resulting from the unlawful
6

employment practices described in paragraph 12, above, including but not limited to out-ofpocket losses in amounts to be detennined at trial.
E. Order Defendant Employer to make Ms. Pressley and Ms. King whole by providing compensation for past and future nonpecuniary losses resulting from the unlawful practices complained of in paragraphs 12, above, including but not limited to pain and suffering, humiliation, loss of life's pleasures, depression, anxiety, stress, panic, and other physical and psychological symptoms and conditions, in amounts to be determined at trial.
F. Order Defendant Employer to pay Ms. Pressley and Ms. King punitive damages for its malicious and reckless conduct described in paragraph 12, above, in amounts to be determined at trial.
G. Grant such further relief as the Court deems necessary and proper in the public interest.
H. Award the Commission its costs of this action.
7

JURy TRIAL DEMAND The Commission requests a jury trial on all questions of fact raised by its complaint.
Eric S. Dreiband General Counsel James L. Lee Deputy General Counsel Gwendolyn Young Reams Associate General COWlsel EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY COMMISSION 'Y<""llll;ton, D.C. on<n~
at Attorney EEOC 21 S. 5th Street, Suite 400 Philadelphia, PA 19106 (215) 440-2683 Pennsylvauia ID No. 37637
8

 
 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA

EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY )

COMMISSION,

)

)

Plaintiff,

)

)

)

v.

)

)

MAIN LINE HEALTH, INC.

)

)

Defendant

)

Civil Action No. 05....092 (MAM)

CONSENT DECREE

This Consent Decree is entered into by the Plaintiff, the United States Equal Employment

Opportunity Commission (the "EEOC" or the "Commission") and the Defendant, Main Line

Health, Inc. ("Main Line Health"), its directors, officers, successors and assigns.

The Commission brought this action on August 2, 2005, in the United States District

Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania to enforce the provisions of Title VII ofthe Civil

Rights Act of 1964, as amended, and Title I of the Civil Rights Act of 1991 ~ 42 US.C. § 2000e,

et seq. ("Title VII") and the Age Discrimination in Employment Act of 1967, 29 U.S.C. 621 et

!!m. (" the ADEA"). The EEOC alleged that Main Line Health violated Title VII and the ADEA

when it failed to select Lorestine Pressley or Diann King for promotion into the position ofLead

Accounts Receivable Representative on the basis of their race, Black and ages, then 53 and 50.

The Commission further alleged that as a result of their non-selection, Ms. Pressley and Ms.

King lost wages and benefits and experienced emotional harm.

As a result of settlement discussions, and in an attempt to avoid further litigation costs,

the parties to this action do hereby agree to entry ofthis Consent Decree (hereinafter referred to

as the "Decree") which shall resolve fully and finally all claims which were raised by the EEOC

in its Complaint filed on behalfofMs. Pressley and Ms. King. It is the intent of the parties that this Decree shall be a final and binding settlement between the parties signatory hereto, their officers, directors, successors and assigns, in full disposition ofall claims alleged in the Commission's Complaint against Main Line Health, Inc.
The Parties hereby agree that: L This Decree is entered into in compromise ofthe claims asserted in this civil action, Main Line Health denies any wrongdoing, and this Decree shall, under no circumstances, be construed or deemed to be evidence of (i) any wrongdoing, fault, or liability; or (ii) any infirmity in the defenses that Main Line Health asserted. 2. The EEOC is the agency of the United States govenunent authorized by Congress to investigate allegations ofunlawful employment discrimination, to bring civil actions based upon these allegations ofunlawful practices, and to seek relief for individuals affected by such practices. 3. The parties stipulate that, pursuant to the Title VII, the ADEA, and 28 U.S.c' 451, 13.31, 1337, 1343, and 1345, the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania has jurisdiction over both the subject matter and the parties in this case, The parties further stipulate that venue is appropriate in the Eastern District of Pennsylvania. 4. The rights ofMain Line Health and those for whom the Commission seeks relief are protected adequately by this Decree. 5. The entry of this Decree will further the objectives ofTitle VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and the Age Discrimination in Employment Act of 1967and will be in the best interests ofthe parties and those for whom the Commission seeks relief.
2

NON-DISCRIMINATION 6 Main Line Health agrees to (i) comply fully with all ofthe provisions of Title VII and the ADEA, and (ii) will avoid engaging in any employment practice which operates to discriminate against individuals on the basis of age or race or to deny equal employment opportunities to any employee or applicant for employment based on his or her race or age in violation of Title VII ofthe Civil Rights Act of 1964 or the Age Discrimination in Employment Act of1967.
NON-RETALIATION 7. Main Line Health agrees that it shall not engage in any employment practices which retaliate in any manner against any person, including but not limited to Ms. Lorestine Pressley and Ms. Diann King, because of that person's cooperation with the EEOC with respect to the Commission's administrative investigation of this civil action. Main Line Health agrees to comply with Title VII's and the ADEA's prohibition ofretaliation because of the filing of a charge, the giving of testimony or assistance, or participation in this matter, or in any investigation, hearing or proceeding under Title VII or the ADEA. Nothing in this Consent Decree, either by inclusion or exclusion, shall be construed to limit Main Line Health's obligations under Title VII or the ADEA or the EEOC's authority to process or litigate any charge ofdiscrimination under Title VII or the ADEA which may be filed in the future.
NON-ADMISSION 8. This Decree, being entered with the consent ofthe Commission and Main Line Health, shall not constitute an adjudication or finding on the merits ofthe case and shall not be construed as an admission of liability by Main Line Health. Main Line Health specifically denies any such liability.
3

DURATION OF THE DECREE 9. The Consent Decree shall be in effect for a period oftwo (2) years from the date it is entered by the Court.
MONETARY COMPENSATION 10. Main Line Health agrees to pay the sum total of Sixteen Thousand Dollars ($16,000.00) minus applicable witholdings, to resolve this matter as follows: (A) Main Line Health shall issue a check in the amount of Eight Thousand Dollars ($8,000.00) minus applicable withholdings, payable to Lorestine Pressley within twenty-one (21) days of receipt of a Release signed by Ms. Pressley. This check shaH be sent, via United States first class mail return receipt requested or by an express mail carrier to Ms. Pressley at the following address: 8521 Cratin Place, Philadelphia, PA 19153. Main Line shall mail a copy of the check to Cynthia A. Locke, Senior Trial Attorney, EEOC Philadelphia District Office, 21 S. S'h Street, The Bourse, Suite 400, Philadelphia, Pa. 19106, concurrent with the mailing of the check to Ms. Pressley, Main Line shall also provide any return receipts returned by the United States Postal Service. (B) Main Line Health shall issue a check in the amount of Eight Thousand Dollars ($8,000.00) minus applicable withholdings, payable to Diann King within twenty-one (21) days of receipt of a Release signed by Ms. King. This check shall be sent, via United States first class mail return receipt requested or by an express mail carrier to Ms. King at the following address: 742 Revere Road, Apartment 129, Yeadon, PA 19050, Main Line shall mail a copy of the check to Cynthia A. Locke, Senior Trial Attorney, EEOC Philadelphia District Office, 21 S. 5,h Street, The Bourse, Suite 400, Philadelphia, Pa. 19106, concurrent with the mailing ofthe check to Ms.
4

King Main Line shall also provide any return receipts returned by the United States Postal Service,
(C) In order to receive the monetary relief set forth above, Lorestine Pressley and Diann
King will be required to execute releases in a form upon which Ms. Pressley, Ms, King, and
Defendant agree. Ms, King and Ms. Pressley are entitled to seek the advice of counsel before signing their releases. Defendant will pay up to Two Hundred and Fifty Dollars ($250. 00) each directly to the respective attorneys retained by Ms, Pressley and Ms King to provide such advice. The attorneys should send the invoices to Tom Mendicino, Esquire, Associate General Counsel at Main Line Health, at Bryn Mawr Hospital, 1.30 South Bryn Mawr Avenue, Bryn Mawr, Pennsylvania 19010.
EQUITABLE RELIEF II ' Main Line Health agrees to the following injunctive relief:
(A) POSTING OF NOTICE Main Line Health agrees that it shall post a copy ofthe Notice attached as Exhibit A at its Wynnewood facility, in areas where employee notices are regularly posted in the Human Resources Office located at 306 Lancaster Avenue. The Notice shall be posted for eighteen (18) months from the date this Decree is entered by the Court, Should the posted copy of the Notice become defaced, marred or otherwise made unreadable, Main Line Health agrees to immediately post a readable copy of the Notice
(B) TRAINING 1. Title VII and ADEA Main Line agrees that it will provide training on the rights of employees and applicants for employment and for promotion under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and the Age
5

Discrimination in Employment Act, and the obligations of employers toward employees and applicants for employment and for promotion under these statutes, within 90 days of the date of the entry of this Decree. This training will include a focus on effective communication with employees, awareness of and sensitivity to bias, including bias of a subtle nature, and how it creates employment problems. This training will be conducted by Al1yson Bennett, Human Resources Manager of Main Line Health Services, Inc. The training will be mandatory for all managers, supervisors, and other persons with authority to hire applicants or promote employees at the Wyrmewood, Pennsylvania facility at 306 Lancaster Avenue. Main Line Health further agrees to conduct this training again for all new managers, supervisors, and other persons with authority to hire or promote, one (1) year after the first training has been completed. Main Line Health agrees that at least fourteen (14) days prior to each training session given, it will provide an outline ofthe topics to be covered and the qualifications of Ms. Bennett Within fourteen (14) days after the completion of each training session, Main Line Health will provide written veri fication to the Commission that the training was conducted, along with a list of attendees and their job titles, and a statement indicating the duration of the training.
2. Policies and Procedures Main Line agrees that, within 90 days of the date ofthe entIy of this Decree, it will provide to all of its managers and supervisors at the Wyrmewood, Pennsylvania facility at 306 Lancaster Avenue who have any involvement in the hiring or promotion process, including but not limited to interviewing prospective candidates for hire or promotion, training in its policies on promotion, transfer. hiring, and co-employment, and will instruct these individuals to read the job descriptions and job postings ofpositions for which they are interviewing candidates, prior to their interviews.
6

3. Training to be Provided to Claimants Pressley and King (a) Main Line agrees that within ninety (90) days ofthe entry of the Consent Decree it will provide Ms. Pressley and Ms. King with Excel training in a program approved by Main Line on a date agreed upon by Main Line, Ms. Pressley and Ms. King, as well as on-the-job guidance/instruction in the areas ofEOB review and Accounts Receivable follow· up, respectively. (b) Main Line agrees that it will provide Ms. King with an overview of the Cash Posting Program by March 1,2007.
DISPUTE RESOLUTION AND COMPLIANCE 12" In the event that the EEOC detennines that a violation ofthis Decree has occurred, it wiH, before exercising any remedy provided by law, provide notice to Tom Mendicino, Esquire, Associate General Counsel at Main Line Health, at Bryn Mawr Hospital, 1.30 South Bryn Mawr Avenue, Bryn Mawr, Pennsylvania 19010. A copy ofthis Notice will be provided to Eileen McAnally, Vice President of Human Resources, at the address on the signature line of this document. Main Line Health will have sixty (60) days in which to investigate and respond to the allegations, unless the Commission detennines there to be exigent circumstances. If these exigent circumstances exist, the Commission may immediately apply to the Court for reHef. The parties shall engage in a good faith effort to resolve any dispute as to compliance prior to seeking review by the Court. Upon motion of either party, the Court may schedule a hearing for the purpose of reviewing compliance with this Decree. The party seeking Court intervention shall be required to give notice to the opposing party ten (I 0) days before moving for such review. The Court may conduct expedited discovery under the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure for purposes of determining compliance wi th this Decree or defending against a claim ofnon~comp1iance. The
7

Court will have all equitable powers, including injunctive relief, to enforce this Decree,
MISCELLANEOUS 13. If any provision(s) of the Consent Decree is found to be unlawful, only the specific provision(s) in question shall be affected and the other provisions will remain in full force and effect. 14. The terms of the Decree are and shall be binding upon the present and future directors, officers, successors and assigns of Main Line Health and upon the EEOC. 15. The Decree constitutes the entire agreement and commitments of the parties. Any modifications to this agreement must be mutually agreed upon and memorialized in a writing signed by Main Line Health and the Commission, 16. When this Decree requires the submission by Main Line Health of any documents to the Commission, if not otherwise indicated in the Decree or Attachments, they shall be mailed to Cynthia A. Locke, Senior Trial Attorney, EEOC Philadelphia District Office, 21 S. 5th Street, The Bourse, Suite 400, Philadelphia, Pa. 19106. 17. Failure by the Commission to seek enforcement ofthis Decree with regard to one provision shall not be construed as a waiver of its rights to do so with regard to the same or other provisions of this Decree. 18. Each party to this Decree shall bear its own expenses, costs and attorneys' fees. 19, This Consent Decree shan be fiJed in the United States District Court for the Eastern District Court ofPennsylvania 20. The Court retains jurisdiction over this case in order to enforce the terms of the Decree,
8

EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY: COMMISSION
RODllld S. Cooper OetletBI C'.ounsel
Gwendolyn Young ReAms AS$ociatc O~Il~ft) Counsel Washington, D,C

MAIN LINE HEALTH. INC.:

ue H, McNair

egional Attorney

Date:

_'1'-1-Ic..::..:c:2:.".;./+~!:..()6~_
r I

~ tl.t.:'1av. <-

JIMiIh'A. Q'Boylo

'-'" 1 -

Supervisory Trial Attorney

Date: P-/o:;3/t) ,

. Date: ~, /tJh
U.S' EEOC Philadelpbia District Office 21 S, Slh Street, Suite 400 Philadelpbia, PA 19106 21 5.440 2683
APPROVED AND SO ORDERED:

Date

HONOR.ABLE MARY A. MCLAUGHI..lN

9

NOTICE This Non~e is posted as pan of a settlement reached in the matt;r of EEOC v. Main bioc Healm.
Inc... C.A. No. 05-401>2. in the U.uted StltC$ Dlsrrlct Court, Eastern District of Pennsylvania
vn EEOC filed. this action to enforce provisions of Title Of1ho Civil,Rlghts At;.t of 1964 and the
Age Di.scrimi~ntien in Entplo)'ment Act of 1967:

vn TiUe of tho Ci'VU Rigbt& Act of 1964, 42 U.S.C. Section 2000e, at a. as amended, ("Title

Vll'1. pn>hibits discrimination 18l1nst employees .and applicantS for employment based upon

race, color, sex, religion. or national orilPll. The Age Discrimination in e.mployment Aot of 1967

(ADEA) ptohlbiu diserimiruulon against emploYfe4 and appU~aDts for empltlyment based upon

their age (40 year&< of age or older). Botb $tatutes ti.u1ber pt:Qhlbit retaliation against employees

or applicants wbo avaH them!:elves oftbeir rights under Tille vn or the ADEA by engaging in

proteetod activities. su~h lIS filing a charge of discrimination and/or tcstifyi:o& or partieipating in a

C6lMll!.sioll investigation. The EEOC is the federal agencywhtch UlVe&tipIes charges of

UJ1lawful employment discrimination, The EEOC ba.s the authority to Mng la.wsuits in federal

court to enfoTce Title vn and the ADEA..

.

The- BEOC filed !hi, action against Dcflmda1\t MaiD Line Health, IDe. to er1!cree provisions of
Title VII 1II\d.!hc ADBA, speeUicaUy alleging that Defendant viOlated the statutes when it did not sele<:t either of two experienced and qualified applicants forpromolioD into a Lead Account& i\eceivable Position due to tbeir racel Black, and their ages, but selected 8. sjgnificantly younger white individual for that promotion. Maid Une Health, Ine, denies the allegations made by
EEOC and. dmies liabilitY in this elISe.

To resolve the OPe, Main Un.: &altb and the E£OC hav~ entered into a Consent Decree which
provide~ among other thing&. that: (l) MaiD Line Health willl10t discriminate on the basis of
race or age; (2) Mam. Line Health win not retaliate against any person be.caulic sh~ or he opposed
an)' practie~ made I.llllawful by the Title VII or the ADiA, filed a eharge of discrlmination.
panfcipated in aproceeding Wlder either of these statures, or asserted any rights under the Consent D,tcree; (3) Main Line Health will train ife managers Ilnd supervisors at its W~ewood
facility lot:ated at 306 LaDcaster Avenue regarding the legal rights of employees and applicants
for employment or promotion UIlasr Title va and the ADU.

It )IOU believe you have been discrimmBted .gainst, you may contact the BBOC at (215) 440-
2600. The EEOC charges no fees and bas employees who speak languages otbar than EngJislt

TIDS NOTICE MUS NOT nt bEVACl',D OR REMOVED AND MUST:REMAJN POSTED
F A. 'UIOD 0 !lClTfEtN (fB) MONtHS FROM TBI DATE SET FORTlt BELOW,
~'~~-
MJ..U!i LINE flUl.TH,(Hi.

Dilte E'ltlt~: _ _.........,..~_ _ _ _:--_...).l006

 
 United States District Court Eastern District of Pennsylvania - Docket Report

Page 1 of 4

CASREF, CLOSED, STANDARD
United States District Court Eastern District of Pennsylvania (Philadelphia) CIVIL DOCKET FOR CASE #: 2:05-cv-04092-MAM

EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY COMMISSION Date Filed: 08/02/2005

v. MAIN LINE HEALTH, INC.

Date Terminated: 06/29/2006

Assigned to: HONORABLE MARY A. MCLAUGHLIN Jury Demand: Plaintiff

Referred to: MAGISTRATE JUDGE DAVID R.

Nature of Suit: 442 Civil Rights: Jobs

STRAWBRIDGE (Settlement)

Jurisdiction: U.S. Government Plaintiff

Cause: 42:2000e Job Discrimination (Employment)

Plaintiff
EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY COMMISSION

represented by CYNTHIA A. LOCKE EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY COMMISSION 21 S. 5TH ST STE 400 PHILADELPHIA, PA 19106 215-440-2683 Email: cynthia.locke@eeoc.gov LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

JACQUELINE H. MCNAIR EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY COMMISSION 21 S. 5TH ST STE 400 PHILADELPHIA, PA 19106 215-440-2687 LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

JUDITH A. O'BOYLE EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY COMMISSION 21 S. 5TH ST STE 400 PHILADELPHIA, PA 19106 215-440-2687 Email: judith.oboyle@eeoc.gov LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

V.

https://ecf.paed.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/DktRpt.pl?104543723948755-L_353_0-1

5/10/2007

United States District Court Eastern District of Pennsylvania - Docket Report

Page 2 of 4

Defendant MAIN LINE HEALTH, INC.

represented by ALLAN M. DABROW BUCHANAN INGERSOLL P.C. ELEVEN PENN CENTER 14TH FLOOR 1835 MARKET STREET PHILADELPHIA, PA 19103 215-665-8700 Email: dabrowam@bipc.com LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

Date Filed 08/02/2005 08/02/2005 08/02/2005 08/05/2005
08/31/2005
08/31/2005 09/01/2005
10/21/2005 10/21/2005

#

Docket Text

1 COMPLAINT against MAIN LINE HEALTH, INC. , filed by EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY COMMISSION.(ti, ) (Entered: 08/02/2005)

One Original Summons Issued as to MAIN LINE HEALTH, INC. Given To: Counsel on 8/2/05 (ti, ) (Entered: 08/02/2005)

DEMAND for Trial by Jury by EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY COMMISSION. (ti, ) (Entered: 08/02/2005)

2 ORDER THAT THE ABOVE CAPTIONED CASE IS REASSIGNED FROM THE CALENDAR OF THE HON. CLARENCE C. NEWCOMER TO THE CALENDAR OF THE HON. MARY A. MCLAUGHLIN.SIGNED BY CLERK OF COURT MICHAEL E. KUNZ ON 8/5/05. 8/5/05 ENTERED AND COPIES MAILED AND EMAILED.(cdd, ) (Entered: 08/05/2005)

3 SUMMONS Returned Executed by EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY COMMISSION re: WILLIAM GRANDIZIO served Summons and Complaint upon MAIN LINE HEALTH, INC. by PERSONAL SERVICE. MAIN LINE HEALTH, INC. served on 8/12/2005, answer due 9/1/2005. (jl, ) (Entered: 08/31/2005)

4 ANSWER to Complaint by MAIN LINE HEALTH, INC., Affirmative Defenses, Certificate of Service.(md, ) (Entered: 09/01/2005)

5 NOTICE of Hearing: RULE 16 STATUS CONFERENCE SET FOR 10/20/2005 04:30 PM IN JUDGE'S CHAMBERS, 3809, UNITED STATES COURTHOUSE, BEFORE THE HONORABLE MARY A. MCLAUGHLIN. (cps, ) (Entered: 09/01/2005)

6 Minute Entry for proceedings held before Judge MARY A. MCLAUGHLIN : Status Conference held on 10/20/05. (ac, ) (Entered: 10/21/2005)

7 SCHEDULING ORDER THAT ALL DISCOVERY DUE BY 5/31/2006. MOTIONS DUE BY 9/8/2006. TELEPHONE CONFERENCE SET FOR 9/18/2006 AT 4:30 P.M. TO DISCUSS

https://ecf.paed.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/DktRpt.pl?104543723948755-L_353_0-1

5/10/2007

United States District Court Eastern District of Pennsylvania - Docket Report

Page 3 of 4

11/15/2005 11/17/2005
01/25/2006
03/22/2006 03/31/2006 04/28/2006
04/28/2006 06/05/2006 06/08/2006

SCHEDULING THE REMAINDER OF THE CASE. CASE IS REFERRED TO MAGISTRATE JUDGE DAVID R. STRAWBRIDGE FOR A SETTLEMENT CONFERENCE TO BE HELD AFTER 11/15/05. SIGNED BY JUDGE MARY A. MCLAUGHLIN ON 10/21/05. 10/21/05 ENTERED AND COPIES MAILED AND EMAILED.(kw, ) (Entered: 10/21/2005)
8 Minute Entry for proceedings held before Judge DAVID STRAWBRIDGE : Telephone Conference held on 11/15/05. (gs) (Entered: 11/15/2005)
9 ORDER THAT A SETTLEMENT CONFERENCE WILL BE HELD IN CHAMBERS, ROOM 4006, 4TH FLOOR, U.S. COURTHOUSE ON 12/19/05 COMMENCING AT 10:00 A.M., ETC.SIGNED BY JUDGE DAVID STRAWBRIDGE ON 11/16/05. 11/17/05 ENTERED AND COPIES MAILED AND E-MAILED.(cdd, ) Modified on 11/17/2005 (cdd, ). Modified on 11/17/2005 (cdd, ). (Entered: 11/17/2005)
10 AMENDED ORDER THAT A SETTLEMENT CONFERENCE IS SET FOR 3/29/2006 AT 10:00 AM IN JUDGE'S CHAMBERS BEFORE MAGISTRATE JUDGE DAVID R. STRAWBRIDGE. SIGNED BY JUDGE DAVID R. STRAWBRIDGE ON 1/24/06. 1/25/06 ENTERED AND COPIES MAILED AND E-MAILED.(mac, ) Modified on 1/25/2006 (mac, ). (Entered: 01/25/2006)
11 NOTICE of Hearing: SETTLEMENT CONFERENCE SET FOR 3/29/2006 at 10:00 a.m. has been changed to 11:15 AM IN JUDGE'S CHAMBERS BEFORE MAGISTRATE JUDGE DAVID R. STRAWBRIDGE. Copies of notice mailed to counsel by chambers.(sah) (Entered: 03/22/2006)
12 Minute Entry for proceedings held before Judge DAVID R. STRAWBRIDGE : Settlement Conference held on 3/29/06, Total time: 5 hours 50 minutes. (mac, ) (Entered: 03/31/2006)
13 FIRST AMENDED SCHEDULING ORDER: DISCOVERY DUE BY 7/17/2006. DAUBERT MOTIONS, SUMMARY JUDGMENT MOTIONS OR OTHER DISPOSITIVE MOTIONS SHALL BE FILED BY 10/23/2006. A TELEPHONE CONFERENCE IS SCHEDULED FOR MONDAY, OCTOBER 30, 2006 AT 4:30 P.M. SIGNED BY JUDGE MARY A. MCLAUGHLIN ON 4/27/06. 4/28/06 ENTERED AND COPIES MAILED AND E-MAILED.(mac, ) Modified on 4/28/2006 (mac, ). (Entered: 04/28/2006)
TELEPHONE CONFERENCE SET FOR 10/30/2006 04:30 PM IN JUDGE'S CHAMBERS BEFORE HONORABLE MARY A. MCLAUGHLIN. (mac, ) (Entered: 05/01/2006)
14 Minute Entry for proceedings held before Judge DAVID R. STRAWBRIDGE : Telephone Conference held on 6/5/06, total time: 15 minutes. (mac, ) (Entered: 06/06/2006)
15 ORDER THAT A SETTLEMENT CONFERENCE IS SET FOR

https://ecf.paed.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/DktRpt.pl?104543723948755-L_353_0-1

5/10/2007

United States District Court Eastern District of Pennsylvania - Docket Report

Page 4 of 4

06/22/2006 06/29/2006 06/29/2006
08/25/2006

6/29/2006 AT 8:30 AM IN JUDGE'S CHAMBERS BEFORE MAGISTRATE JUDGE DAVID R. STRAWBRIDGE. SIGNED BY JUDGE DAVID R. STRAWBRIDGE ON 6/8/06. 6/8/06 ENTERED AND COPIES MAILED AND E-MAILED.(mac, ) (Entered: 06/08/2006)
16 SETTLEMENT CONFERENCE SET FOR 6/29/2006 AT 10:00 AM BEFORE MAGISTRATE JUDGE DAVID R. STRAWBRIDGE. THIS HAS BEEN RESCHEDULED FROM 8:30 A.M. COUNSEL NOTIFIED VIA TELEPHONE AND U.S. MAIL.(sah) (Entered: 06/22/2006)
17 Minute Entry for proceedings held before Judge DAVID R. STRAWBRIDGE : Settlement Conference held on 06/29/06. (np) (Entered: 06/30/2006)
18 ORDER THE ABOVE ACTION IS DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE, PURSUANT TO AGREEMENT OF COUNSEL WITHOUT COSTS. (SIGNED BY JUDGE MARY A. MCLAUGHLIN ON 6/29/06) 6/30/06 ENTERED AND COPIES MAILED & E-MAILED.(fh) (Entered: 06/30/2006)
19 SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT Consent Decree by EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY COMMISSION. (LOCKE, CYNTHIA) (Entered: 08/25/2006)

PACER Service Center
Transaction Receipt

05/10/2007 13:08:59

PACER Login:

hs0328

Client Code:

Description:

Docket Report

Search Criteria:

Billable Pages: 2

Cost:

eeoc
2:05-cv-04092MAM 0.16

https://ecf.paed.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/DktRpt.pl?104543723948755-L_353_0-1

5/10/2007