Case 2:05-cv-05371-HH Document 1 Filed 10/13/2005 Page 1 of 8

United States Equal Employment Opportunity Commission 21 S. 5th Street, Suite 400 Philadelphia, PA 19106
Rachel M. Smith Trial Attorney Counsel for Plaintiff EEOC (215) 440-2642
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA

EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY COMMISSION,

CIVIL ACTION NO:

Plaintiff,

COMPLAINT JURY TRIAL DEMAND

JERITH MANUFACTURING COMPANY,

Defendant.

NATURE OF THE ACTION This is an action under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and Title I of the Civil Rights Act of 1991 to correct unlawful employment practices on the basis of race (black) and to provide appropriate relief to Steven Johnson and a class of similarly situated black employees who were adversely affected by such practices. As articulated with greater particularity in Paragraph 7 below, the Commission alleges that Defendant Employer Jerith Manufacturing Company unlawfully terminated Mr. Johnson and a class of black supervisors while Defendant Employer did not terminate white supervisors who were alleged to have engaged in the same conduct. As a result of Defendant’s discriminatory conduct, Steven Johnson and a class of black employees suffered damages, including lost wages and emotional distress damages.

Case 2:05-cv-05371-HH Document 1 Filed 10/13/2005 Page 2 of 8

JURISDICTION AND VENUE

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

1337,1343 and 1345. This action is authorized and instituted pursuant to § 706(0(1) and (3) of

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

("Title VIF’) and Section 102 of the Civil Rights Act of 1991, 42 U.S.C. § 1981A.

2. 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

3. Plaintiff, the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (the "Commission"), is

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

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

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

4. At all relevant times, Defendant Employer has continuously been and is now

doing business in the State of Pennsylvania, in the City of Philadelphia, and has continuously

had at least 15 employees.

5.

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

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

Title VII, 42 U.S.C. §§ 2000e(b), (g) and (h).

Case 2:05-cv-05371-HH Document 1 Filed 10/13/2005 Page 3 of 8

STATEMENT OF CLAIMS

6.

More than thirty days prior to the institution of this lawsuit, a charge of

discrimination was filed with the Commission, alleging violations of Title VII by Defendant

Employer. All conditions precedent to the institution of this lawsuit have been fulfilled.

7. Since at least February 2003, Defendant Employer has engaged in unlawful employment practices at its Philadelphia, Pennsylvania facility in violation of Section 703(a)(1)

of Title VII, 42 U.S.C. Section 2000e-2(a)(1) by discriminating against Steven Johnson and a

class of similarly-situated black employees on the basis of their race (black). The unlawful

employment practices included, but were not limited to, the following:

(a) Mr. Johnson was hired in 1998 by Defendant Employer as a production supervisor.

At all relevant times, Mr. Johnson maintained an exemplary record and had never received any

complaints about his performance.

(b) In early 2000, Mr. Johnson was promoted to Assistant Plant Manager.

(c) At the time of Mr. Johnson’s promotion, he was the only black Assistant Plant

Manager. Not long after Mr. Johnson was promoted, Mr. Marrone, Plant Manager, approached

Mr. Johnson regarding his suspicion that Mr. Johnson was engaged in a sexual relationship with

a female subordinate employee. Mr. Johnson immediately and vehemently denied the allegation.

(d) Mr. Johnson did not directly supervise the female subordinate employee.

(e) In early 2002, Defendant’s management conducted an investigation into

"rumors" about Mr. Johnson and the female subordinate employee.

Case 2:05-cv-05371-HH Document 1 Filed 10/13/2005 Page 4 of 8

(f) Defendant’s internal investigation did not reveal any evidence that Mr. Johnson and the female subordinate employee were ever romantically involved. Moreover, the female

employee emphatically denied the allegation.

(g) Despite finding that the accusations against Mr. Johnson were unfounded, Defendant terminated Mr. Johnson on or about February 25, 2003.

(h)

While charges of racial and disability harassment were brought by two

subordinate employees against Matthew Feeko, (white), Defendant’s Vice President of

Operations, and another white supervisor, neither Mr. Feeko, nor the white supervisor, were

terminated as a result.

(i) Mr. Johnson personally complained to Plant Manager Marrone about a white co-

worker who physically threatened him at work. According to company policy, the white

employee should have been terminated for his conduct. No discipline was taken against the

employee despite Mr. Johnson’s complaint.

(j)

In addition, Defendant’s workplace was permeated with rumors that a white

manager had an extra-marital affair with a female subordinate employee. In addition, rumors

circulated that at least two other white supervisors were sexually involved with subordinate

female employees. Yet, neither white supervisor was terminated.

(k) In addition to the disparate treatment, differenttiearlms and conditions of

employment, and unlawful termination, white managers made racially offensive comments to

Mr. Johnson demonstrating Defendant’s racial animus. Comments were made to Mr. Johnson by white managers, such as "you’re the dark fat guy;"; "do you black guys have a problem." Referring to black supervisors who did not attend an office Christmas party, Plant Manager

Case 2:05-cv-05371-HH Document 1 Filed 10/13/2005 Page 5 of 8
Marrone told Mr. Johnson: "You’d better tell your ’brothers" to go and apologize ... for not attending." No one was terminated or disciplined for making these racially offensive comments.
(1) In addition to Mr. Johnson, three other black supervisors were terminated within a six-month span of time for various alleged infractions. Similarly situated white comparators were not terminated or disciplined for committing the same or similar infractions.
8. The unlawful employment practices complained of in paragraphs 7(a) through (1) above were intentional.
9. The acts complained of in paragraphs 7 (a) through (1) above were intentional. 10. The unlawful employment practices complained of in paragraph 7 (a) through (1) above were done with malice or with reckless indifference to the federally protected rights of Steven Johnson and a class of similarly situated black employees.
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 of race. B. Order Defendant Employer to institute and carry out policies, practices, and programs which provide equal employment opportunities and which provide for a work environment free of discrimination, and which eradicate the effects of its past and present unlawful employment practices. C. Order Defendant Employer to institute and carry out anti-discrimination policies and complaint procedures.

Case 2:05-cv-05371-HH Document 1 Filed 10/13/2005 Page 6 of 8
D. Order Defendant Employer to institute and carry out complaint procedures which encourage employees to come forward with complaints regarding violations of its policies against discrimination.
E. Order Defendant Employer to institute and carry out a training program which shall promote supervisor accountability imposing on all managers and supervisory personnel a duty to actively monitor their work areas to ensure compliance with policies on non-discrimination; and requiring all managers and supervisors to report any incidents and/or complaints of discrimination of which they become aware to the department charged with handling such complaints.
F. Order Defendant Employer to make whole Steven Johnson and a class of affected black employees by providing appropriate back pay and front pay with prejudgment interest, in amounts to be determined at trial, and other affirmative relief necessary to eradicate the effects of its unlawful employment practices.
G. Order Defendant Employer to make whole Steven Johnson and a class of affected black employees by providing compensation for past and future pecuniary losses resulting from the unlawful employment practices described in paragraphs 7 (a) through (1) above, including, but not limited to out-of-pocket losses, in amounts to be determined at trial.
H. Order Defendant Employer to make whole Steven Johnson and a class of affected black employees by providing compensation for past and future nonpecuniary losses resulting from the unlawful practices complained of in paragraphs 7 (a) through (1) above, including pain and suffering, humiliation, embarrassment, loss of life’s enjoyment and pleasures, depression, anxiety and inconvenience, in amounts to be determined at trial

Case 2:05.cv-05371-HH Document 1 Filed 10/13/2005 Page 7 of 8

I. Order Defendant Employer to pay Steven Johnson and a class of affected black

employees punitive damages for its malicious and reckless conduct described in paragraphs 7 (a)

through (1) above, in amounts to be determined at trial.

Jo

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

interest. K.

Award the Commission the costs of this action.

Case 2:05-cv-05371-HH Document 1 Filed 10/13/2005 Page 8 of 8
JURY TRIAL DEMAND The Commission requests a jury trial on all questions of fact raised by its complaint.
James L. Lee Deputy General Counsel Gwendolyn Young Reams Associate General Counsel Washington, D.C. EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY COMMISSION
J/~(CQUgI_~rg H. MCNAIR Regional Attorney
Supe~so~ Trial Atomey
~c~ M(S~fi " Valdafi~n C~de: ~$3797 TfiN A~omey U.S. EEOC, PhiladelpNa DisNct Office 21 S. 5th S~eet, Suite 400 PN1Melphia, PA 19106 (215) 440-2642 (~rect) (215) 440-2848(f~)

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

EQUAL EMPLOYMENT

:

OPPORTUNITY COMMISSION :

:

v.

:

:

STEVEN JOHNSON, Intervenor :

:

v.

:

:

JERITH MANUFACTURING

:

COMPANY

:

CIVIL ACTION NO. 05-5371

O R D E R AND NOW, this 18th day of August, 2006, it having been reported that the issues between the parties in the above action have been resolved and upon Order of the Court pursuant to the provisions of Rule 41.1(b) of the Local Rules of Civil Procedure of this Court, it is ORDERED that the above action is DISMISSED with prejudice pursuant to agreement of counsel without costs.
BY THE COURT:
Berle M. Schiller, J.

 
 _~(\~J

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA

EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY COMMISSION
Plaintiff, and
STEVEN JOHNSON Plaintiff-Intervenor
~
JERITHMANUFACTURING Defendant.

)

)

)

Civil Action No. 05-5371 (BMS) (JPH)

)

)

)

)

CONSENT DECREE

)

)

)

)

006

INTRODUCTION

A. This action was instituted by the United States Equal Employment Opportunity

Commission (the "EEOC" or the "Commission") on or about October 13, 2005 against lerith

Manufacturing under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and Title 1 of the Civil Rights Act

of 1991 ("Title VII"). The EEOC alleged that Defendant lerith Manufacturing, ("Jerith

Manufacturing" or "Defendant"), discriminated against Mr. Johnson because of his race, African

American, when Defendant unlawfully terminated him. Defendant denies these allegations.

B. This Consent Decree is entered into by the EEOC and Defendant Jerith Manufacturing.

tpThiS Consent Decree shall be final and binding between the EEOC and Defendant Jerith
~ IV] 6( Manufacturing, its directors, officers, agents, employees, successors or assigns and all persons in
~ active concert or participation with it, (hereinafter collectively referred to as ("Jerith

''f- Manufacturing" or "Defendant").

~~~ C.

The Commission and Defendant do hereby agree to the entry ofthis Consent Decree,

r1 (\ J\ \ JLr~ '~iCh shall fully and finally resolve all claims which were raised by the EEOC in its Complaint
1tf\., Ci~iJ Action No. 05-CV-5371 this Consent Decree shall not constitute an adjudication of or
S ;~,/"{,\.Y~'v(~~I~t[,J.F

finding on the merits of the case and shall not be construed as a violation of Title VII by Defendant, which in fact Defendant denies.
CONSENT DECREE Upon consent of the parties to this action, it is hereby ORDERED, ADJUDGED and DECREED that:
NON-DISCRIMINATION AND NON-RETALIATION 1. This Court has jurisdiction over the parties and the subject matter of this action. 2. Defendant is enjoined from engaging in any employment practice which constitutes unlawful discrimination under Title VII. 3. Defendant shall not divulge, directly or indirectly, except as required by law, to ~my employer or potential employer of Steven Johnson, any of the facts or circumstances related to the charge of discrimination against Defendant, or any of the events relating to their participation in the litigation of this matter. 4. Jerith Manufacturing shall expunge from the personnel files of Steven Johnson any documents and/or related papers pertaining to any discipline that was a subject of this litigation. In response to a request for an employment reference, Defendant shall provide only a confirmation ofMr. Johnson's job title, dates of employment and salary. 5. Defendant shall comply fully with all provisions of Title VII. Nothing in this Consent Decree, either by inclusion or exclusion, shall be construed to limit the obligations of Defendant under Title VII or the EEOC's authority to process or litigate any charge of discrimination which may be filed against Jerith Manufacturing in the future.
2

MONETARY RELIEF 6. Defendant agrees to pay monetary relief in the total amount of $50,000.00 to Stever Johnson, in full settlement of the claims against Defendant which were raised in the Commission's Complaint. If Jerith Manufacturing does not comply and fails to pay the designated amount set forth in this Paragraph, the Court will enter a judgment for the entire amount remaining due, plus costs, and interest to be paid at the legal rate, compounded daily. Defendant will mail a photocopy of each check to the EEOC, to the attention of Rachel M. Smith, Trial Attorney, EEOC, The Bourse, 21 South Fifth Street, Suite 400, Philadelphia, PA 19106-2515, within five days of the date of mailing of the check or checks to Mr. Johnson's private counsel.
POSTING OF NOTICE 7. Within ten (10) business days after entry of this Decree, or as soon as practicable, Jerith Manufacturing shall post same-sized copies of the Notice attached as Exhibit 1 to this Decree on all bulletin boards located at its Philadelphia, PA facility usually used by Defendant for communicating with employees. The notice shall remain posted for one year from the date of entry of this Decree. Counsel for Jerith Manufacturing shall provide a copy of the Notice, and ~m indication of the date and location of its posting, to the EEOC's Philadelphia District Office, attention, Rachel Smith, Trial Attorney, within ten (10) days of the posting. Defendant shall permit a representative of the EEOC to enter Defendant's premises for purposes of verifying compliance with this Paragraph at any time during normal business hours with prior notice. Defendant shall take all reasonable steps to ensure that the posting is not altered, defaced or covered by any other material. Should the posted copies become defaced, removed, marred, or
3

otherwise illegible, Jerith Manufacturing agrees to as soon as practicable post a readable copy in the same manner as hereto specified.
NON-DISCRIMINATION POLICIES AND COMPLAINT PROCEDURES 8. Jerith Manufacturing's policy or policies against discrimination and complaint procedures shall be drafted in plain and simple language. Jerith Manufacturing shall ensure that its policy or policies against discrimination and related complaint procedures meet the following minimum criteria: (a) State that Jerith Manufacturing: (i) prohibits discrimination against employees on the basis of race; and (ii) prohibits retaliation against employees for opposing employment practices they reasonably believe are discriminatory or for participating in an investigation by the EEOC or a state or local governmental agency of a charge of discrimination under Title VII; (b) Include a complaint procedure designed to encourage employees to come forward with complaints regarding violations of its policy or policies against discrimination which shall meet the following minimum criteria: (i) provide effective mechanism(s) for reporting incidents of discrimination and retaliation; (ii) provide that the complaints of discrimination and/or retaliation can be made either in writing or verbally; (iii) identify employees to whom ~m employee can make a complaint; (iv) encourage prompt reporting by employees; and (v) provide assurances that complainants shall not be subjected to retaliation; (c) Provide for prompt investigation of complaints of discrimination; (d) Provide for prompt communication to the complaining party of the results of the investigation and any remedial actions taken or proposed; and (e) Provide for discipline up to and including discharge of an employee or supervisor
4

who violates Jerith Manufacturing' policy or policies against discrimination and for increasingly severe discipline of repeat offenders.
9. Jerith Manufacturing shall distribute to all of its employees and newly-hired employees at its Philadelphia, PA facility, its policy or policies against discrimination and retaliation within 90 days after entry of this Consent Decree.
10. Within 90 days after entry of this Consent Decree, Jerith Manufacturing shall advise Rachel M. Smith, Trial Attorney, EEOC's Philadelphia District Office, that its policy or policies against discrimination and retaliation have been distributed to current employees via paycheck enclosure and that new employees will receive these policies and an opportunity to acknowledge receipt. lerith Manufacturing will retain copies of any acknowledgment of receipt form for an employee in the employee's personnel file.
11. Within 90 days after the entry of this decree, Jerith Manufacturing shall send a copy of its policy or policies against discrimination and retaliation with each employef~'s paycheck.
SUPERVISOR ACCOUNTABILITY 12. Jerith Manufacturing shall promote supervisor accountability by the following conduct:
(a) Providing anti-discrimination training to all of its supervisory and managerial personnel as set forth in Paragraph l3;
(b) Disciplining, up to and including discharge, any supervisor or manager who violates Jerith Manufacturing' policy or policies against discrimination;
5

(c) Imposing on all managers and supervisory personnel a duty to administer their work areas to ensure compliance with lerith Manufacturing' policy or policies agains1 discrimination; and
(d) Requiring all managers and supervIsors to report any incidents andlor complaint of discrimination of which they become aware to the President of Jerith Manufacturing, a supervisor, or a Human Resources manager.
TRAINING 13. Defendant shall provide training on the requirements of Title VII on the following terms: a. Defendant agrees to provide a training seSSIOn to all if its managers and supervisors by a trainer or vendor approved by the EEOC to provide training on an employee's rights under Title VII, and the employer's obligations under Title VII, with an emphasis on What constitutes unlawful and differential treatment of minority employees in the workplace, how to keep Defendant free of such forms of discrimination; b. The training session will include a live presentation by a high ranking official of lerith Manufacturing, emphasizing lerith Manufacturing' commitment to prevent discrimination; c. Defendant shall first provide training in accordance with Paragraph 13(a) by no later than December 31,2006. 14. In addition to the training described in Paragraph 13, Defendant will provide training to all Managers and all employees and supervisors in its Human Resources Department who are responsible for workers employed at lerith Manufacturing, regarding conducting a prompt and effective investigation into allegations, complaints, or charges of employment discrimination.
6

15.

The training shall be provided by EEOC staff or Defendant shall obtain the

EEOC's approval of its proposed trainer prior to the training sessions. Jerith Manufacturing shall

submit the name, address, telephone number and curriculum vitae Iresume of the proposed

trainer, together with the date(s) of the proposed training sessions to the EEOC within thirty (30)

calendar days prior to the first day of the proposed date(s) of training. The Commission shall

have ten (10) calendar days from the date of receipt of the information described above to accept

or reject the proposed trainer(s). In the event the EEOC does not approve Defendant's

designated trainer(s), Defendant Jerith Manufacturing shall have ten (10) calendar days to

identify an alternate trainer. The EEOC shall have ten (10) calendar days from the date of

receipt of the information described above to accept or reject the alternate trainer. In the event

the Commission does not approve Defendant's alternate trainer, the Commission shall designate

the trainer to be retained and paid for by Jerith Manufacturing. Jerith Manufacturing shall have

ten (10) calendar days from receipt of the Commission's recommendation to accept or reject the

alternate trainer.

16. Defendant agrees to provide the EEOC with any and all copies of pamphlets,

brochures, outlines or other written materials provided to the participants of the training sessions.

17. Jerith Manufacturing shall certify to the EEOC in writing within five (5) business

days after the training sessions have occurred that the training has taken place and that the

required personnel have attended. Such certification shall include: (i) the dates, location and

duration of the training session; and (ii) a copy of the registry of attendance, which shall include~

the name and position of each person in attendance

DISPUTE RESOLUTION

18. In the event that either party to this Decree believes that the other party has failed

7

to comply with any provision(s) of the Decree, the complaining party shall notify the other party of the alleged non-compliance within ten (10) days of the alleged non-compliance and shall afford the alleged non-complying party ten (10) business days to remedy the non-compliance or to satisfy the complaining party that the alleged non-complying party has complied. If the alleged non-complying party has not remedied the alleged non-compliance within ten (10) business days, the complaining party may apply to the Court for appropriate relief
MISCELLANEOUS PROVISIONS 19. Each party to this Decree shall bear its own expenses, costs and attorneys' fees. 20. The terms of this Decree are and shall be binding upon the present and future representatives, agents, directors, officers, assigns, and successors of Defendant in their capacities as representatives, agents, directors and officers of Jerith Manufacturing, and not in their individual capacities. This Paragraph shall not be construed as placing any limit on remedies available to the Court in the event that any individual is found to be in contempt for a violation of this Decree. 21. This Consent Decree shall fully and finally resolve all claims which were raised by the EEOC in its Complaint in Civil Action No. 05-CV-5371. 22. This Consent Decree shall be filed in the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania and shall continue to be in effect for a period of one year and SIX (6) months. Any application by any party to modify or vacate this Consent Decree during such period shall be made by motion to the Court on no less than thirty (30) days notice to the other party. 23. The Court retains jurisdiction over this case in order to enforce the terms of the Consent Decree.
8

24. The Clerk of the District Court is hereby directed to send a file-stamped copy of

this Consent Decree to counsel of record.

For Plaintiff EEOC:
James L. Lee Deputy General Counsel
Gwendolyn Young Reams Associate General Counsel Washington, D.C.
EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY COMMISSION

For Defendant Jerith Manufacturing
nt-~v\~L
Frank A. Chernak, Esq. Ballard, Spahr, Andrews & Ingersoll 1735 Market Street, 51 sl Floor
Philadelphia, PA 19103-7599

~dA,d/~~
J lth A. O'Boyle Supervisory Trial Attorney

Rachel M. Smith Trial Attorney
EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY COMMISSION
Philadelphia District Office 21 S. 5th Street, Suite 400 Philadelphia, PA 19106
IT IS ORDERED:
BY THE COURT: BERLE M. SCHILLER UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

la -1<6-- DATE:1'

0

9

EXHIBIT 1

NOTICE TO ALL JERITH MANUFACTURING EMPLOYEES

This Notice is being posted pursuant to a Consent Decree entered by the Federal Court in EEOC. et al. v. Jerith Manufacturing Civil Action Number 05-5371 (E.D.PA), resolving a lawsuit filed by the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission ("EEOC") against Jerith Manufacturing ("Jerith Manufacturing") .

Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, 42 U.S.c. Section 2000e, ~ seq., as amended, ("Title VII"), prohibits discrimination against employees and applicants for employment based upon race, color, sex, religion or national origin. Title VII further prohibits retaliation against employees or applicants wbo avail themselves of their rights under Title VII by engaging in protected activities, such as opposing employment practices believed to be discriminatory, filing a charge of discrimination and/or testifying or participating in a Commission investigation. The EEOC is a federal agency which investigates charges of unlawful employment discrimination. The EEOC has authority to bring lawsuits in Federal Court 1'0 enforce Title VII.

In its lawsuit, the EEOC alleged that Jerith Manufacturing discriminated against an employt:~e because of his race, African American, when Defendant unlawfully terminated him. The Defendant denies these allegations.

To resolve the case, Jerith Manufacturing and the EEOC have entered into a Consent Decree which provided, among other things, that: (1) Jerith Manufacturing will not discriminate on the basis of race; (2) Jerith Manufacturing will not retaliate against any person because she or he opposed any practice made unlawful by Title VII, filed a charge of discrimination, participated in any Title VII proceeding, or asserted any rights under the Consent Decree; and (3) Jerith Manufacturing will train all employees at its Philadelphia, PA facility regarding race discrimination and Jerith Manufacturing's policy prohibiting race discrimination.

If you believe you have been discriminated against, you may contact the EEOC at (215) 440," 2600. The EEOC charges no fees and has employees who speak languages other than English.
THIS IS AN OFFICIAL NOTICE AND MUST NOT BE DEFACED BY ANYONE

This Notice must remain posted for one year from the date below and must not be altered,

defaced or covered by any other material. Any questions about this Notice or compliance

with its terms may be directed to the: Regional Attorney, EEOC Philadelphia District

fice, 21 Sout 5th treet, Philadelphia, PA 19106.

By: For:

~~.vQ6 By:
For: Jerith Manu acturillg

10

 
 United States District Court Eastern District of Pennsylvania - Docket R... https://ecf.paed.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/DktRpt.pl?969878454251726-L_3...
CLOSED, STANDARD
United States District Court Eastern District of Pennsylvania (Philadelphia) CIVIL DOCKET FOR CASE #: 2:05-cv-05371-BMS

EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY COMMISSION v. JERITH MANUFACTURING COMPANY Assigned to: HONORABLE BERLE M. SCHILLER Cause: 42:2000e Job Discrimination (Employment)

Date Filed: 10/13/2005 Date Terminated: 08/18/2006 Jury Demand: Plaintiff Nature of Suit: 442 Civil Rights: Jobs Jurisdiction: U.S. Government Plaintiff

Plaintiff
EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY COMMISSION

represented by 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

RACHEL M. SMITH EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY COMMISSION 21 S. 5TH ST. STE. 400 PHILA, PA 19106 215-440-2688 Email: rachel.smith@eeoc.gov LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

Intervenor Plaintiff STEVEN JOHNSON

represented by TIMOTHY M. KOLMAN TIMOTHY M. KOLMAN AND

1 of 5

6/6/2007 10:16 AM

United States District Court Eastern District of Pennsylvania - Docket R... https://ecf.paed.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/DktRpt.pl?969878454251726-L_3...

V.
Defendant JERITH MANUFACTURING COMPANY

ASSOCIATES 225 NORTH FLOWERS MILL ROAD LANGHORNE, PA 19047 215-750-3134 Fax: 215-750-3138 Email: timothykolman@earthlink.net LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
WAYNE A. ELY TIMOTHY M. KOLMAN AND ASSOCIATES 225 FLOWERS MILL RD. LANGHORNE, PA 19047 215-750-3134 Email: wmely1@comcast.net LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
RUFUS A. JENNINGS TIMOTHY M. KOLMAN & ASSOC 225 N. FLOWERS MILL ROAD LANGHORNE, PA 19047 215-750-3134 Email: rjennings@kolmanlaw.net ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
represented by FRANK A. CHERNAK BALLARD SPAHR ANDREWS & INGERSOLL LLP 1735 MARKET ST 51ST FL PHILADELPHIA, PA 19103-7599 215-665-8500 Fax: 215-864-8999 Email: chernakf@ballardspahr.com LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

Date Filed 10/13/2005

#

Docket Text

1 COMPLAINT against JERITH MANUFACTURING COMPANY , filed by EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY COMMISSION.(ks, ) (Entered: 10/14/2005)

2 of 5

6/6/2007 10:16 AM

United States District Court Eastern District of Pennsylvania - Docket R... https://ecf.paed.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/DktRpt.pl?969878454251726-L_3...

10/13/2005 10/13/2005 11/28/2005
11/28/2005 01/13/2006 01/13/2006 01/13/2006 01/19/2006
01/30/2006 02/21/2006

Summons Issued as to JERITH MANUFACTURING COMPANY. Forwarded To: COUNSEL on 10/14/2005 (ks, ) (Entered: 10/14/2005)
DEMAND for Trial by Jury by EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY COMMISSION. (ks, ) (Entered: 10/14/2005)
2 SUMMONS Returned Executed by EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY COMMISSION re: Tom Fredericks served Summons and Complaint upon JERITH MANUFACTURING COMPANY by Personal Service. JERITH MANUFACTURING COMPANY served on 11/7/2005, answer due 11/28/2005. (cdd, ) (Entered: 11/28/2005)
3 ANSWER to Complaint together with Affirmative Defenses of Defendant Jerith Manufacturing Company by JERITH MANUFACTURING COMPANY, Certificate of Service. (CHERNAK, FRANK) Modified on 11/29/2005 (np). (Entered: 11/28/2005)
4 NOTICE of Appearance by WAYNE A. ELY on behalf of EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY COMMISSION (ELY, WAYNE) (Entered: 01/13/2006)
5 CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE by EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY COMMISSION re 4 Notice of Appearance on behalf of Plaintiff Steven Johnson (ELY, WAYNE) (Entered: 01/13/2006)
6 MOTION to Intervene on behalf of Plaintiff Steven Johnson filed by EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY COMMISSION.Memorandum of Law, Certificate of Service. (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit A)(ELY, WAYNE) (Entered: 01/13/2006)
7 SCHEDULING ORDER THAT DISCOVERY DUE BY 9/11/2006. PLAINTIFF PRETRIAL MEMO DUE BY 9/18/2006. DEFENDANT PRETRIAL MEMO DUE BY 9/25/2006. TRIAL POOL SET FOR 10/2/2006. PRETRIAL AND TRIAL PROCEDURES BEFORE THE COURT ARE ATTACHED HERETO AND ARE INCORPORATED HEREIN. SIGNED BY JUDGE HERBERT J. HUTTON ON 1/9/06. 1/19/06 ENTERED AND COPIES MAILED, E-MAILED AND FAXED.(le, ) (Entered: 01/19/2006)
8 RESPONSE to Motion re 6 MOTION to Intervene on behalf of Plaintiff Steven Johnson filed by JERITH MANUFACTURING COMPANY, Certificate of Service. (CHERNAK, FRANK) Modified on 1/31/2006 (np). (Entered: 01/30/2006)
9 ORDER THAT STEVEN JOHNSON'S MOTION FOR LEAVE TO INTERVENE IS GRANTED AND HE IS HEREBY PERMITTED TO INTERVENE AS A PLAINTIFF IN THIS MATTER AND THAT THE COMPLAINT ATTACHED AS EXHIBIT "A" TO MOVANT'S MOTION FOR PERMISSION TO INTERVENE SHALL BE DEEMED FILED AS OF THE DATE OF THIS ORDER AND THAT DEFENDANT SHALL RESPOND TO THAT COMPLAINT WITHIN 20 DAYS OF THE DATE OF THIS ORDER. SIGNED BY JUDGE HERBERT J. HUTTON ON 2/17/06.2/21/06 ENTERED AND COPIES MAILED AND FAXED. (le, ) (Entered: 02/21/2006)

3 of 5

6/6/2007 10:16 AM

United States District Court Eastern District of Pennsylvania - Docket R... https://ecf.paed.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/DktRpt.pl?969878454251726-L_3...

02/21/2006 03/09/2006 04/12/2006
04/17/2006
05/22/2006 05/23/2006
05/24/2006 05/25/2006 05/30/2006
07/21/2006 08/18/2006

10 Complaint against JERITH MANUFACTURING COMPANY filed by STEVEN JOHNSON.(le, ) (Entered: 02/21/2006)
11 Defendant's ANSWER to Complaint of Intervenor Steven Johnson by JERITH MANUFACTURING COMPANY with Affirmative Defenses, Certificate of Service. (CHERNAK, FRANK) Modified on 3/10/2006 (np). (Entered: 03/09/2006)
12 ORDER THAT THIS CASE IS REASSIGNED FROM JUDGE HERBERT J. HUTTON TO JUDGE BERLE M. SCHILLER FOR ALL FURTHER PROCEEDINGS. SIGNED BY CLERK OF COURT, MICHAEL E. KUNZ ON 4/12/06. 4/13/06 ENTERED AND COPIES E-MAILED AND FAXED.(le, ) (Entered: 04/13/2006)
13 ORDER THAT A RULE 16 SCHEDULING CONFERENCE IS SET FOR 5/23/2006 AT 9:00 AM IN JUDGE'S CHAMBERS, ROOM 5614 BEFORE HONORABLE BERLE M. SCHILLER. SIGNED BY JUDGE BERLE M. SCHILLER ON 4/17/06. 4/17/06 ENTERED AND COPIES E-MAILED.(le, ) (Entered: 04/17/2006)
14 NOTICE of Appearance by RUFUS A. JENNINGS on behalf of STEVEN JOHNSON (JENNINGS, RUFUS) (Entered: 05/22/2006)
15 SCHEDULING ORDER THAT ALL FACT DISCOVERY SHALL BE COMPLETED BY 8/28/06; A FINAL PRETRIAL CONFERENCE WILL BE HELD ON 10/24/06 AT 8:30 A.M.; FINAL PRETRIAL MOTIONS ARE DUE BY 10/23/06; A JURY TRIAL IN THE ABOVE CAPTIONED CASE IS SET FOR 11/6/06 AT 9:30 A.M.; ETC.. SIGNED BY JUDGE BERLE M. SCHILLER ON 5/23/06. 5/23/06 ENTERED AND E-MAILED.(jl, ) (Entered: 05/23/2006)
16 ORDER THAT THIS CASE IS REFERRED TO MAGISTRATE JUDGE JACOB P. HART FOR A SETTLEMENT. SIGNED BY JUDGE BERLE M. SCHILLER ON 5/23/06. 5/24/06 ENTERED AND COPIES E-MAILED.(afm, ) (Entered: 05/24/2006)
17 Minute Entry for proceedings held before Judge BERLE M. SCHILLER : Pretrial Conference held on 5/23/06. (gs) (Entered: 05/26/2006)
18 ORDER THAT A SETTLEMENT CONFERENCE IS SET FOR 7/20/2006 AT 10:00 AM IN JUDGE'S CHAMBERS, ROOM 3006 BEFORE MAGISTRATE JUDGE JACOB P. HART. SIGNED BY JUDGE JACOB P. HART ON 5/30/06. 5/30/06 ENTERED AND COPIES E-MAILED AND FAXED.(le, ) (Entered: 05/30/2006)
19 Minute Entry for proceedings held before Judge JACOB P. HART : Settlement Conference held on 7/20/06. (le, ) (Entered: 07/21/2006)
20 ORDER THAT THIS MATTER IS DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE AND WITHOUT COSTS PURSUANT TO LOCAL RULE 41.1(b). SIGNED BY JUDGE BERLE M. SCHILLER ON 8/18/06. 8/18/06 ENTERED AND COPIES E-MAILED.(le, ) (Entered: 08/18/2006)

4 of 5

6/6/2007 10:16 AM

United States District Court Eastern District of Pennsylvania - Docket R... https://ecf.paed.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/DktRpt.pl?969878454251726-L_3...

09/18/2006

21 CONSENT DECREE THAT DEFENDANT IS ENJOINED FROM ENGAGING IN ANY EMPLOYMENT PRACTICE WHICH CONSTITUTES UNLAWFUL DISCRIMINATION UNDER TITLE VII; DEFENDANT AGREES TO PAY MONETARY RELIEF IN THE TOTAL AMOUNT OF $50,000 TO STEVEN JOHNSON, IN FULL SETTLEMENT OF ALL CLAIMS AGAINST DEFENDANT WHICH WERE RAISED IN THE COMMISSION'S COMPLAINT; EACH PARTY TO THIS DECREE SHALL BEAR ITS OWN EXPENSES, COSTS AND ATTORNEYS FEES; THIS CONSENT DECREE SHALL FULL AND FINALLY RESOLVE ALL CLAIMS AND SHALL BE IN EFFECT FOR A PERIOD OF 1YEAR AND 6 MONTHS, ETC..... SIGNED BY JUDGE BERLE M. SCHILLER ON 9/18/06. 9/19/06 ENTERED AND COPIES MAILED AND FAXED.(afm, ) (Entered: 09/19/2006)

PACER Service Center

Transaction Receipt

06/06/2007 11:07:00

PACER Login:

hs0328

Client Code:

Description:

Docket Report

Search Criteria:

Billable Pages: 2

Cost:

eeoc 2:05-cv-05371-BMS 0.16

5 of 5

6/6/2007 10:16 AM