Case 3:11-cv-00596-WHB-RHW Document 1 Filed 09/26/11 Page 1 of 7

EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY )

COMMISSION,

)

)

Plaintiff,

)

)

v.

)

*VENTURE, INC. d/b/a Save-A-Lot,

)

Defendant.

)

)

,;,
'-,~ _.-.,.,....

CIVIL ACTION NO. j: II ~V 59to (;JH~

COMPLAINT

LRA

JURY TRIAL DEMAND

NATURE OF THE ACTION This is an action under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, as amended, 42 U.S.C. §2000e et seq. ("Title VII"), and Title I of the Civil Rights Act of 1991, to correct unlawful employment practices on the basis of sex (female) and retaliation, and to provide appropriate relief to Yumeiko Hodge ("Hodge") and a class of female employees who were adversely affected by such practices. As alleged with greater particularity in paragraphs six (6) through eight (8) below, Defendant Venture, Inc., d/b/a Save-A-Lot ("Defendant" or "Sav-A-Lot") sexually harassed Hodge and a class of female employees at Defendant's Jackson, Mississippi store, and terminated Hodge in retaliation for her opposition to Defendant's unlawful conduct. Moreover, as alleged with greater particularity below, the Defendant failed to post and keep posted the notices required by Section 711(a) of Title VII, 42 U.S.C. § 2000e-l0(a).
JURISDICTION AND VENUE 1. Jurisdiction of this Court is invoked pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §§ 451,1331,1337,1343

Case 3:11-cv-00596-WHB-RHW Document 1 Filed 09/26/11 Page 2 of 7
and 1345. This action is authorized and instituted pursuant to Sections 706(f)(1) and (3) of TitleVII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, as amended, 42 U.S.C. Sections 2000e-5(f)(I)("Title VII"), and Section 102 of the Civil Rights Act of 1991,42 U.S.C. 1981a. 2. The employment practices alleged to be unlawful were committed within the jurisdiction of the United States District Court for the Southern District of Mississippi.
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. Section 2000e-5(f)(1) and (3). 4. At all relevant times, Defendant Employer has continuously been a Mississippi corporation doing business in the State of Mississippi and in the City of Jackson, 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).
STATEMENT OF CLAIMS 6. More than thirty days prior to the institution of this lawsuit, Hodge filed a charge 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 June, 2009, Defendant Employer has engaged in unlawful employment practices at its Jackson, Mississippi store in violation of Section 703(a) of Title VII, 42 U.S.C. § 2000e-2(a)(1) and 2000e-2(a). Specifically, Defendant subjected Hodge and a class of female employees who worked at Defendant's Jackson, Mississippi store from 2006 through the present
2

Case 3:11-cv-00596-WHB-RHW Document 1 Filed 09/26/11 Page 3 of 7

date to routine unwanted, degrading and offensive sexual misconduct, often culminating III

adverse employment actions, based on their sex (female):

a. for example, Jeff Stewart ("Stewart"), Defendant's Operations Manager, would

proposition Hodge and other female employees for sex, including offering them money, higher

salaries, and other benefits for sex, or taking or threatening adverse actions against them

depending on their response to his sexual aggression (e.g. termination, cutting their pay);

b. for example, Stewart would propose performing graphic and lewd sex acts with

Hodge and other female employees, and make graphic and lewd sexual comments to them (e.g.

"that his penis belongs in an employee's vagina, "that he wanted to f-k" a female employee

"real bad", that he wanted to see an employee naked; Stewart commented about employees'

"butts" and breasts, invited an employee to hold his penis while he urinated, told an employee

that his penis was bigger than her boyfriend's, invited an employee into the bathroom for a

sexual encounter, cornered an employee in an office for a sexual encounter, and inquired of

another employee whether she liked "cream filling," and whether she liked sex with females);

d. for example, Stewart sexually groped female employees and touched them in their

private areas, including sticking his hands down their pants;

e. for example, Stewart took sexual photographs and made videos of female

employees' bodies and then displayed them in the workplace;

f.

for example, Stewart engaged in sexually graphic demonstrations and gestures,

including grabbing or pointing to his penis, pointing to female employee's private parts, and

stuffing food in his groin area to simulate a sexual organ;

g. Stewart's conduct was open and notorious among employees, supervisors and

managers;

3

Case 3:11-cv-00596-WHB-RHW Document 1 Filed 09/26/11 Page 4 of 7

h. Some employees were afraid to complain about Stewart's conduct because

Stewart was intimidating and had a reputation for penalizing employees who resisted,

complained about, or challenged him;

1.

Some Employees and managers believed or knew Defendant was aware of

Stewart's conduct and complaints by employees about it, and did not believe Defendant would

correct it even if they complained.

J.

Defendant was aware of complaints about Stewart sexually harassing female

employees, but failed to take effective preventive or corrective action;

k. Employee protests directly to Stewart did not stop his conduct.

1.

Stewart's conduct was severe and pervasive.

8. On or about August 2009, Defendant Employer engaged in unlawful employment

practices at its Jackson, Mississippi store in violation of Section 704(a) of Title VII, 42 U.S.C. §

2000e-3(a).

a.

Hodge complained to Defendant's Store Manager, Sam Whitehead ("Whitehead)

about Stewart sexually harassing her.

b. Shorty after Hodge reported the harassment to Whitehead, Hodge became

involved in a minor, verbal altercation with another cashier after that cashier slammed a door

into a chair in which Hodge was sitting. After the altercation, Stewart contacted Hodge to inform

her that she was terminated. In contrast, no action was taken against the other cashier.

c. Whitehead later contacted Hodge and apprised her that the incident was not her

fault.

9. Since at least June, 2011, Defendant Save-A-Lot has willfully failed, in violation of

Section 711(a) and (b) of Title VII, 42 U.S.C. § 2000e-10(a) and (b), to post and keep posted

notices which have been prepared or approved by the Commission setting forth excerpts from or
4

Case 3:11-cv-00596-WHB-RHW Document 1 Filed 09/26/11 Page 5 of 7
summaries of the pertinent provisions of Title VII and information pertinent to the filing of a charge or complaint.
a. During an onsite investigation at Defendant's premises on June 2, 2011, an EEOC investigator noted that Defendant failed to have posted in conspicuous places where notices to employees and applicants for employment are customarily posted, the requisite notice. 10. The effect of the practices complained of in paragraph(s) six (6) through eight (8) above has been to deprive Hodge and a class of female employees who worked at Defendant's Jackson, Mississippi store of equal employment opportunities and, otherwise, adversely affect their status as employees, because of their sex, female. 11. The unlawful employment practices complained of in paragraphs six (6) through eight (8) above were intentional. 12. The unlawful employment practices complained of in paragraphs six (6) through eight (8) above were done with malice or with reckless indifference to the federally protected rights of Hodge and a class of females.
PRAYER FOR RELIEF Wherefore, the Commission respectfully requests that this Court: A. Grant a permanent injunction enjoining Defendant Sav-A-Lot, its officers, agents,
servants, employees, attorneys, and all persons in active concert or participation with them, from engaging in sexual harassment, any other employment practices which discriminate on the basis of sex, and retaliation for opposition to such practices. B. Order Defendant Sav-A-Lot to institute and carry out policies, practices, and programs which provide equal employment opportunities for women and for persons who oppose conduct prohibited by Title VII, and which eradicate the effects of its past and present unlawful employment practices.
5

Case 3:11-cv-00596-WHB-RHW Document 1 Filed 09/26/11 Page 6 of 7
C. Order Defendant Sav-A-Lot to make whole Hodge and class of female employees, by providing appropriate backpay with prejudgment interest, in amounts to be determined at trial, and other affirmative relief necessary to eradicate the effects of its unlawful employment practices, including but not limited to front pay.
D. Order Defendant Save-A-Lot to make whole Hodge and class of female employees by providing compensation for past and future nonpecuniary losses resulting from the unlawful practices complained of in paragraphs six (6) through eight (8) above, including emotional pain, suffering, inconvenience, loss of enjoyment of life, and humiliation, in amounts to be determined at trial.
E. Order Defendant Save-A-Lot to pay Hodge and class of female employees punitive damages for its malicious and reckless conduct described in paragraphs six (6) through eight (8) above, in amounts to be determined at trial.
F. Order Defendant Sav-A-Lot to post and keep posted notices in accordance with the provisions of Section 711(a) of Title VII, 42 U.S.C. § 2000e-10(a) and assess appropriate civil fines against the Defendant pursuant to Section 711 (b) of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964,42 U.S.C. § 2000e-10(b).
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.
6

Case 3:11-cv-00596-WHB-RHW Document 1 Filed 09/26/11 Page 7 of 7

JURY TRIAL DEMAND The Commission requests a jury trial on all questions of fact raised by its complaint.
RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED,

P. David Lopez General Counsel

James L. Lee Deputy General Counsel

Gwendolyn Young Reams Associate General Counsel

U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission 131 M. Street E
waztington, DC 2050.('
, /' , ~.?J -- v\~, L"v(,'\...u.( -

C. EMANUEL SMITH (MS Bar # 7473)

RegiF'\1 Att~rney (j

\,.,. h\ t.(~.) -Z.

i~
\J.;2{W\

Ii

JULIE BEAN (DC Bar #433292)

Supervisory Trial Attorney

EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY COMMISSION, Birmingham District Office Ridge Park Place, Suite 2000 1130 22nd Street, South Birmingham, Alabama 35205 Telephone: (205) 212-2045 Facsimile: (205) 212-2041

7

 
 Case 3:11-cv-00596-WHB-RHW Document 129 Filed 11/22/13 Page 1 of 26

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF MISSISSIPPI
JACKSON DIVISION

EQUAL EMPLOYMENT

]

OPPORTUNITY COMMISSION, ]

]

PLAINTIFF,

]

]

VS.

]

]

]

VENTURE, INC., D/B/A

]

SAVE-A-LOT

]

] ]

DEFENDANT.

]

_____________________________________

CIVIL ACTION 3:11-CV-596-WHB-LRA

CONSENT DECREE

I. INTRODUCTION

Plaintiff Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (hereinafter “EEOC”

or “Commission”) brought this action against Defendant Venture, Inc. d/b/a Save-

A-Lot (“Venture, Inc.” or “the Defendant”) under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act

of 1964, 42 U.S.C. Section 2000e et seq., as amended by Title I of the Civil Rights

Act of 1991 (“Title VII”). The Commission brought this action on behalf of

Yumieko Hodge, Shamekia Williams-Nichols, Panisha Williams, Keisha Flowers,

Chasity Robinson, Crystal Spann, Sheeba Dixon, Kecia Boone, Francesa Sanders,

Frandreka Sanders, Brittany Bridges, Sophia Harris, Ralencia Pickens, Alice Kelly,

Meshia Pickens, Ayzhe Wilder, Jasmine Robinson, Shameka Riley, Jasmine

Case 3:11-cv-00596-WHB-RHW Document 129 Filed 11/22/13 Page 2 of 26
Crozier, Shakia Kenreich, Krischel Nelson, Charessa Walker, Tawanda Mack, Jeanell Brownlee, Ruby Krueger, Sabrina Dent, Erielle Mack, Valarie Cotton, Mary Galey, Linda Brinson, Maria Shelton, Virea Shelton and anyone else the EEOC identifies as a class member (said individuals being referred to hereafter collectively as “the Class”) the public interest and Charging Party Yumeiko Hodge (“Hodge”); alleging Defendant discriminated against a class of female employees at its Mississippi stores. More specifically, the Commission alleges that Venture, Inc. discriminated against Hodge and a class of similarly situated female employees on the basis of sex (female) by allegedly subjecting them to a sexually hostile work environment. The Commission further alleges that Defendant’s actions and failure to take effective remedial relief caused mental, emotional, and physical harm to the Class. Moreover, the Commission alleges Defendant terminated Yumeiko Hodge in retaliation for her opposition to Defendant’s unlawful conduct. On January 5, 2012, Plaintiff-Intervenor Franseca Sanders (“Sanders”) filed a complaint pursuant to Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, 42 U.S.C. § 2000e et seq., as amended by the Civil Rights Act of 1991. Sanders alleges Venture, Inc. subjected her to sexual harassment and a hostile work environment based on sex. Defendant denies all of these allegations.
The Commission, on behalf of itself and the Class, Hodge, Sanders, and Venture, Inc. (collectively referred to as the “Parties”), to avoid the expense of
2

Case 3:11-cv-00596-WHB-RHW Document 129 Filed 11/22/13 Page 3 of 26
extensive discovery and litigation, and to avoid the uncertainty of contested and disputed facts and liability, have decided to resolve this matter through settlement and the entry of this Consent Decree.
1. This Consent Decree (“the Consent Decree”) is entered into by the EEOC and Venture, Inc. to settle all claims asserted. This Consent Decree, and its terms, shall be final and binding on the EEOC and Venture, Inc., including its present and future representatives, agents, directors, officers, assigns and successors and all persons in active concert or participation with it.
2. The EEOC and Defendant Venture, Inc. do hereby agree to the entry of this Consent Decree, which shall fully and finally resolve all claims which were raised by the EEOC in its Complaints (including all amendments thereto) in Civil Case No. 3:11-CV-596-WHB-LRA. This Consent Decree shall not constitute an adjudication of or finding on the merits of the case and shall not be construed as an admission or acknowledgment by Defendant of any violation of Title VII.
3. Defendant Venture, Inc. denies the allegations contained in Commission's Complaint (including all amendments thereto) and Sanders’ Complaint (including all amendments thereto). It is understood that the entry of this Consent Decree does not constitute an admission by Venture, Inc. of any violation of Title VII, §1981, or any provisions of Mississippi law, and that all allegations of liability are expressly denied by Venture, Inc.
3

Case 3:11-cv-00596-WHB-RHW Document 129 Filed 11/22/13 Page 4 of 26
II. GENERAL PROVISIONS Upon consent of the parties to this action, it is hereby ORDERED, ADJUDGED, and DECREED that: 4. This Court has jurisdiction over the parties and the subject matter of this action. The Parties stipulate to the jurisdiction of the Court and waive a hearing and the entry of findings of fact and conclusions of law. 5. The terms of this Consent Decree are and shall be binding upon the present and future representatives, agents, directors, officers, heirs, assigns, and successors of the Parties. This paragraph shall not be construed as placing any limit on remedies available to the Court in the event that any of the Parties and/or individual is found to be in contempt for a violation of this Consent Decree. 6. The Consent Decree shall fully and finally resolve all claims which were raised by the EEOC in its Complaint (including all amendments thereto) in Civil Case No. 3:11-CV-596-WHB-LRA with prejudice. This Consent Decree shall fully and finally resolve all claims contained in, or arising out of, Yumeiko Hodge’s Charge of Discrimination, Charge No. 423-2009-02298, and all claims asserted on behalf of the Class. The Consent Decree does not affect any other administrative charges which may be pending with the EEOC, except that the Class’ release shall cover all claims asserted that existed or accrued on or before August 15, 2013. This paragraph shall not be construed as placing any limit on
4

Case 3:11-cv-00596-WHB-RHW Document 129 Filed 11/22/13 Page 5 of 26
remedies available to the Court in the event that any party or individual is found to be in contempt of the Consent Decree.
7. No waiver, modification, or amendment of any provision of this Decree shall be effective unless made in writing, approved by all Parties to this Decree, and approved by the Court or ordered by the Court.
8. The Consent Decree shall be filed in the United States District Court for the Southern District of Mississippi and shall continue to be in effect for a period of thirty (30) months from the date the Consent Decree is entered by the Court. Any modification of this Consent Decree by any party must be made by motion to the Court.
9. The Court retains jurisdiction over this case in order to enforce the terms of the Consent Decree.
10. This Consent Decree constitutes the complete agreement among the Parties with respect to matters referred to herein. This Decree is final and binding upon the Parties, their agents, successors, and assigns.
11. The Consent Decree shall apply to the Defendant’s Mississippi operations, and all employees, including temporary and contract employees working in or for these stores, and all employees in any other location who provide EEO compliance and human resources support to, and supervisory and/or decisionmaking authority over these locations.
5

Case 3:11-cv-00596-WHB-RHW Document 129 Filed 11/22/13 Page 6 of 26
III. MONETARY RELIEF 12. Venture, Inc. agrees to pay in full settlement of all claims alleged against it by the Class and the EEOC the gross sum of three hundred twenty-five thousand dollars ($325,000), (“the Settlement Fund”) as follows:
(a) one hundred thousand dollars ($100,000) within thirty (30) days of the entry of this Consent Decree;
(b) twenty-five thousand dollars ($25,000) within one hundred twenty (120) days of the entry of this Consent Decree;
(c) thirty-three thousand three hundred thirty-three and 33/100ths dollars ($33,333.33) within two hundred ten (210) days of the entry of this Consent Decree;
(d) thirty-three thousand three hundred thirty-three and 33/100ths dollars ($33,333.33) within three hundred (300) days of the entry of this Consent Decree;
(e) thirty-three thousand three hundred thirty-three and 33/100ths dollars ($33,333.33) within three hundred ninety (390) days of the entry of this Consent Decree;
(f) thirty-three thousand three hundred thirty-three and 33/100ths dollars ($33,333.33) within four hundred eighty (480) days of the entry of this Consent Decree;
6

Case 3:11-cv-00596-WHB-RHW Document 129 Filed 11/22/13 Page 7 of 26
(g) thirty-three thousand three hundred thirty-three and 33/100ths dollars ($33,333.33) within five hundred seventy (570) days of the entry of this Consent Decree; and
(h) thirty-three thousand three hundred thirty-three and 35/100ths dollars ($33,333.35) within six hundred sixty (660) days of the entry of this Consent Decree. The EEOC shall determine how the Settlement Fund is to be allocated among the Class (including Hodge and Sanders) and shall provide written notice of same to Defendant within ten (10) days after entry of this Decree. 13. For Sanders, payment by individual check shall be delivered to her counsel from Venture, Inc. in the amount designated by the Commission within eight days of the Court’s filing of this Consent Decree. Sanders must execute a release in order to receive these settlement funds. Venture will provide copies of those checks to the EEOC and to a trustee named by the Commission (the “Trustee”). Venture shall receive a credit towards the $100,000 payment for the amount of the aforementioned payment(s) to Sanders. The remainder of the funds due on that date will be paid directly to the Trustee. The Trustee or his designee1
1 In order to facilitate tax reporting, the EEOC and Venture have agreed as follows. The Trustee shall notify Venture in writing when the Trustee has funds on hand for a payment to a claimant. Upon Venture’s receipt of this written notice, Venture has two business days to advise the Trustee of Venture’s desire to make said payment directly to the claimant. In the event Venture advises the Trustee that it desires to make said payment directly to the claimant, the Trustee shall make arrangements to provide the
7

Case 3:11-cv-00596-WHB-RHW Document 129 Filed 11/22/13 Page 8 of 26
shall make payment to the individual Hodge and the individual Class members by check payable to each individual Class member and/or her counsel. Each individual check shall be in an amount specified by the Commission, paid when funds are on hand for payment, and delivered to counsel for the individual Class member or directly to the identified Class Member at an address provided by EEOC. The Trustee shall mail a photocopy of each check to the attention of the Regional Attorney, Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, Birmingham District Office, 1130 – 22nd Street South, Suite 2000, Birmingham, Alabama 35205 at the time the check is mailed. The Trustee shall be entitled to deduct a Trustee’s fee not to exceed an amount equal to 3% of the amount disbursed.
14. The parties agree that the monies paid in settlement of this case are for asserted emotional distress damages and for asserted backpay damages sustained by each individual Class member, Hodge and Sanders as a result of the alleged conduct complained of on their behalves in the Complaints (including all amendments thereto). The parties agree and stipulate that 20% of the payment to each class member shall be treated as back wages and subject to appropriate withholdings. The remaining payments shall be paid as compensatory damages
funds for said payment to Venture, and Venture shall make the payment directly to the claimant forthwith, without delay, after the funds received from the Trustee have cleared, and Venture shall mail a photocopy of each check to the attention of the Regional Attorney, Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, Birmingham District Office, 1130 – 22nd Street South, Suite 2000, Birmingham, Alabama 35205, and to the Trustee at the time the check is mailed.
8

Case 3:11-cv-00596-WHB-RHW Document 129 Filed 11/22/13 Page 9 of 26
and no withholdings shall be made from that portion of the payment. Venture, Inc. shall report all monetary payments to the individual Class members under this Decree on IRS Form 1099 and on form IRS Form W-2 as appropriate.
15. The payment shall be in full, complete and absolute satisfaction and settlement of the EEOC’s claims that it asserted or could have asserted on behalf of the Class, Hodge’s claims and Sanders’ claims of sex discrimination, retaliation and/or posting violations against Venture, Inc., which is the consideration for, and basis of, this Consent Decree, as alleged in the EEOC Charge filed by Yumeiko Hodge and raised or asserted in the EEOC’s Complaint (including all amendments thereto) and Sanders’ Complaint (including all amendments thereto).
16. Within 10 days after the entry of this Consent Decree, the EEOC shall provide Venture with a confidential notice containing the name, address, date of birth, and social security number of each member of the Class, as well as the amount to be disbursed to each Claimant. The Release for all class members shall be delivered by Venture to the Trustee within 20 days thereafter. The Trustee shall provide the Release to each Class member at the time payment is tendered to that Class member, and each Class member must execute the release in order to receive the settlement funds from the Trustee. The Trustee shall not make the payment to any class member unless the particular class member to whom the payment is tendered executes the Release.
9

Case 3:11-cv-00596-WHB-RHW Document 129 Filed 11/22/13 Page 10 of 26
17. An individual Class Member and/or Hodge may appeal the EEOC’s
determination of the amount designated for her as settlement from the Settlement
Fund. The objection, however, is limited to challenging the EEOC’s application of
the criteria set forth below. Individual Class Members and Hodge may not
challenge the Consent Decree or any of the terms herein.
A. Criteria. EEOC will determine the settlement amount of each
individual Class Member and Hodge claim based on the following criteria:
(a) Hodge’s and individual Class Member’s age, education level, or other vulnerability factors at the time of the alleged discrimination and/or alleged constructive discharge;
(b) the nature and extent to which Hodge or individual Class Member was allegedly subjected to a hostile work environment based on sex during the relevant period;
(c) the severity of alleged harassment to which Hodge or individual Class Member was subjected during the relevant period;
(d) the length of time Hodge or individual Class Member worked in the alleged sexually hostile environment during the relevant period;
(e) whether Hodge or individual Class Member made efforts to complain about the alleged hostile conditions of employment during the relevant period;
(f) whether Hodge or individual Class Member was actually or allegedly constructively terminated during the relevant period;
(g) the nature and extent of alleged emotional injury to Hodge or individual Class Member;
10

Case 3:11-cv-00596-WHB-RHW Document 129 Filed 11/22/13 Page 11 of 26
(h) the specificity and verifiability of Hodge or individual Class Member’s allegations; and (i) the extent to which Hodge or individual Class Member participated in and contributed to the EEOC’s litigation effort.
B. Written Objection to EEOC. A Charging Party or individual Class Member may object by delivering to EEOC’s Regional Attorney C. Emanuel Smith c/o Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, Birmingham District Office, 1130 22nd Street South, Suite 2000, Birmingham, Alabama 35205, Fax: (205) 212-2041, a detailed written explanation of the basis for the objection at any time prior to January 1, 2014.
C. If there are objections to the settlement amount, EEOC will promptly forward them to the attention of U.S. Magistrate Judge Robert Walker with a statement of position by EEOC. Copies of the objection shall be forwarded also to the Defendant. The parties agree that Magistrate Walker may conduct a hearing, if necessary, to determine any unresolved objections. The determination on the settlement amount objection by Magistrate Judge Walker shall be final for purposes of this Consent Decree.
18. Any of the settlement monies that remain unclaimed more than six hundred sixty (660) days after the entry of this Consent Decree (“Residual Funds”), including earned interest, shall be distributed to an organization(s) selected by the EEOC to receive the residual funds. EEOC shall provide Venture,
11

Case 3:11-cv-00596-WHB-RHW Document 129 Filed 11/22/13 Page 12 of 26
Inc. with the recipient organization’s identity and contact information within six hundred sixty (660) days after the entry of this Consent Decree. Trustee shall issue the Residual Funds, by check made out to the recipient organization(s), within thirty (30) days of the EEOC providing Venture, Inc. the identity of, and contact information for, the recipient organization(s). The organization shall be one or more organizations whose focus includes seeking workplace equality for women. Defendant shall mail a photocopy of the check to the attention of the Regional Attorney, Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, Birmingham District Office, 1130 – 22nd Street South, Suite 2000, Birmingham, Alabama 35205 at the time the check is mailed to the recipient organization. In no event shall there be a reversion of any part of the settlement monies to Venture, Inc.
IV. GENERAL INJUNCTIVE RELIEF 19. Defendant Venture, Inc. shall not engage in any employment practice which constitutes unlawful sexual harassment, sexual discrimination or retaliation under Title VII. Specifically, Defendant Venture, Inc. is enjoined from creating, fostering or tolerating or subjecting any employee to a sexually hostile work environment, or retaliation under Title VII. 20. Defendant Venture, Inc. shall develop effective policies and/or procedures that seek to prevent employees from being subjected to sexual harassment, sexual discrimination and retaliation under Title VII. The prohibited
12

Case 3:11-cv-00596-WHB-RHW Document 129 Filed 11/22/13 Page 13 of 26
harassment, discrimination, and retaliation shall include retaliatory and sexually hostile, offensive, and derogatory conduct or communications including, but not limited to, touching, threats, taunts, jokes, comments, statements, demonstrations, images, photographs, cartoons, drawings, and/or graffiti. The referenced policies and/or procedures also shall prohibit sex or retaliation from being an implicit or explicit term of employment.
21. Defendant Venture, Inc. shall develop policies and/or procedures that require that investigations and inquiries into reports of sexual harassment, sexual discrimination, and retaliation be conducted in good faith, and that allow employees to raise concerns or complaints about sexual harassment, sexual discrimination and retaliation without fear of retaliation.
22. Defendant Venture, Inc. shall develop policies and/or procedures that require that all documents related to or generated by allegations of sexual harassment, sexual discrimination, and retaliation by any employee are placed and maintained in a confidential file marked “Sex/Retaliation Allegations.” Defendant Venture shall develop policies and/or procedures that require consideration of past allegations and findings of sexual harassment, sexual discrimination, and retaliation against an employee, supervisor or manager in investigating and making determinations related to new allegations of sexual harassment, sexual discrimination, or retaliation against the same employee, supervisor or manager.
13

Case 3:11-cv-00596-WHB-RHW Document 129 Filed 11/22/13 Page 14 of 26
23. Defendant Venture, Inc. shall develop policies and/or procedures that provide that employees, supervisors and managers who engage in sexual harassment, sexual discrimination, or retaliation will be subject to discipline, up to and including discharge.
24. Defendant Venture, Inc.’s policies and/or procedures shall ensure that, to the extent that supervisors and managers undergo verbal or written informal or formal performance evaluations, their enforcement of and compliance with Title VII, this Consent Decree, and Defendant Venture, Inc.’s sexual harassment, sexual discrimination, and retaliation policies and procedures shall be discussed and factored into their evaluation and any related rating, or other employment action. To the extent Defendant Venture, Inc. uses written performance evaluations for supervisors and managers, the written evaluations shall identify as a factor in the evaluation the supervisor’s or manager’s compliance with Title VII, this Consent Decree, and Defendant Venture, Inc.’s sexual harassment, sexual discrimination, and retaliation policies and procedures, and shall describe how the supervisor or manager performed in the area of sexual harassment and retaliation.
25. Defendant Venture, Inc. shall develop policies and/or procedures that provide for the distribution and dissemination of its sexual harassment, sexual discrimination, and retaliation policies and procedures to all its employees, supervisors, and managers. Defendant Venture, Inc. shall develop policies and/or
14

Case 3:11-cv-00596-WHB-RHW Document 129 Filed 11/22/13 Page 15 of 26
procedures that educate all employees, supervisors and managers on how to report sexual harassment and that encourages them to do so.
26. Defendant Venture, Inc. shall develop policies and/or procedures for training employees, supervisors and managers in the areas of sexual harassment, sexual discrimination, and retaliation.
27. Defendant Venture, Inc. shall comply fully with all provisions of this Consent Decree and Title VII. Nothing in this Consent Decree, either by inclusion or exclusion, shall be construed to limit the obligations of Defendant Venture, Inc. under Title VII or the EEOC’s authority to process or litigate any charge of discrimination which may be filed against Defendant Venture, Inc. in the future.
28. Defendant Venture, Inc. shall remove from the personnel files of the individual Class members any negative information related to the alleged discrimination and/or retaliation the Class Members allege to have experienced at the Mississippi stores.
V. SPECIFIC INJUNCTIVE RELIEF 29. Defendant Venture, Inc. shall require that all allegations of sexual harassment, sexual discrimination, and retaliation that are discovered or observed by, or brought to the attention of, a Defendant Venture, Inc. supervisor or manager is relayed by that supervisor or manager to Dan Myers (“Myers”), or in the event Myers is no longer affiliated with Venture, Inc., the Defendant’s Human Resources
15

Case 3:11-cv-00596-WHB-RHW Document 129 Filed 11/22/13 Page 16 of 26
Director. 30. Defendant Venture, Inc.’s employees shall report sexual harassment,
sexual discrimination, and retaliation to Myers, the Store Manager, or the Defendant’s Human Resources Director.
31. On discovery by Myers or the Human Resources Director or on receipt by Myers or the Human Resources Director of an allegation, report or complaint of sexual harassment, sexual discrimination, or retaliation, Myers, the Human Resources Director or his/her/their designee shall initiate an investigation of the alleged misconduct within twenty-four hours of discovery or receipt of the information, or on the first business day after discovery or receipt, whichever is later. The investigation initiated by Myers, the Human Resources Director, or his/her/their designee shall include, but not be limited to, interviewing the alleged victim, alleged harasser and other persons alleged to have knowledge of the relevant events. The investigation shall include, but not be limited to, identifying and interviewing persons with knowledge about prior instances of sexual harassment and retaliation by the alleged harasser, and reviewing documents related to prior instances of sexual harassment, sexual discrimination, and retaliation by the alleged harasser.
32. Defendant Venture, Inc. as part of its investigation of and inquiries into allegations, reports or complaints of sexual harassment, sexual discrimination,
16

Case 3:11-cv-00596-WHB-RHW Document 129 Filed 11/22/13 Page 17 of 26
and retaliation, shall memorialize the sexual harassment, sexual discrimination, and retaliation allegations, reports and complaints in writing, obtain written statements, make written findings (including the names and contact information for witnesses) and make written determinations and recommendations. These, and any other documents generated by or related to the investigation or inquiry, shall be placed and retained in the confidential file described above in this Consent Decree (Sex/Retaliation Allegations file), and maintained by the person responsible for the Human Resources function (or his/her designee). In the event Defendant Venture, Inc. shall find or determine an allegation, report or complaint of harassment, discrimination, or retaliation to be substantiated, or if the finding or determination is inconclusive, Defendant Venture shall place and retain in the alleged harasser’s official personnel file a notice directing the reader to the Sex/Retaliation Allegations file.
33. Defendant Venture, Inc. shall require that any employee who is determined to have sexually harassed, sexually discriminated, or retaliated against another employee in violation of Title VII and Defendant’s policies and procedures shall be notified by Defendant Venture, Inc. in writing and required to attend at least two (2) hours of anti-harassment, anti-sexual discrimination, and antiretaliation counseling, unless the employee’s employment with Venture, Inc. is terminated for such harassment. Willful failure to attend counseling on the
17

Case 3:11-cv-00596-WHB-RHW Document 129 Filed 11/22/13 Page 18 of 26
direction of the Defendant Venture, Inc. shall be entered into the employee’s official personnel file and the confidential file and shall be grounds for discipline, up to and including termination.
34. Defendant Venture, Inc. shall not retaliate against any person because of that person’s allegation, report or complaint of sexual harassment, sexual discrimination, or retaliation, opposition to any practice made unlawful under Title VII, or filing of a charge, giving of testimony or assistance, or participation in any manner in any investigation, hearing or proceeding under Title VII.
35. Named class members shall direct all communication regarding their employment with Venture, Inc. to Dan Myers. In the event Mr. Myers receives an inquiry from any prospective employer concerning the named class member’s employment with Venture, Inc. he will limit the information provided to the named class member’s title, and dates of employment. Mr. Myers shall not divulge, directly or indirectly, to any employer or potential employer of the named class members any of the facts or circumstances related to the underlying charge of discrimination against Defendant Venture, Inc. or any of the events relating to the named class member’s participation in the litigation of this matter.
36. Defendant Venture, Inc. shall, to the degree reasonably possible, seek to ensure that allegations of sexual harassment, sexual discrimination, and retaliation, and the associated investigation and determination, are not made public
18

Case 3:11-cv-00596-WHB-RHW Document 129 Filed 11/22/13 Page 19 of 26
and are shared only with potential witnesses when it determines that such disclosure is necessary to conduct a thorough interview and investigation. Witnesses shall be required to maintain the disclosure as confidential.
VI. POSTING OF NOTICE 37. Within sixty (60) business days after entry of the Consent Decree, Defendant Venture, Inc. shall post 8½ inch x 11 inch sized copies of the Notice attached as Exhibit A to the Consent Decree on all bulletin boards usually used by Defendant Venture, Inc. for announcements, notices of employment policy or practice changes to employees at all stores in the State of Mississippi, including but not limited to stores located in Jackson, Mississippi, Yazoo City, Mississippi, and Brookhaven, Mississippi. 38. Defendant Venture, Inc. shall provide a copy of the signed Notice, and an indication of the date(s) and location(s) of its posting, to the attention of the Regional Attorney of EEOC’s Birmingham District Office, at the address set forth above, within ten (10) days of the posting. Defendant Venture, Inc. shall permit a representative of the EEOC to enter Venture’s premises at its Jackson, Mississippi stores at any time during normal business hours for the purpose of verifying compliance with this paragraph. 39. Defendant Venture, Inc. shall take all reasonable steps to ensure that the posting is not altered, defaced, covered by any other material, or removed.
19

Case 3:11-cv-00596-WHB-RHW Document 129 Filed 11/22/13 Page 20 of 26
Should the posted copy become altered, defaced, covered or removed, or become otherwise illegible, Defendant Venture, Inc. shall promptly re-post a legible copy in the same manner as heretofore specified. The posted Notice shall be the same type, style and size as the printing on Exhibit A and shall bear the signature of the chief executive officer of Venture, Inc.
VII. TRAINING 40. Defendant Venture, Inc. shall provide training at its Mississippi locations on the requirements of Title VII on the following terms:
a. Within six (6) months of the effective date of this Consent Decree, Defendant Venture, Inc. shall provide training to all of its Mississippi employees, supervisors and managers on employee and management rights and obligations under Title VII, with a special emphasis on Title VII’s prohibitions against sexual harassment, sexual discrimination, and retaliation and on Defendant Venture’s policy against sexual harassment, sexual discrimination, and retaliation. The training shall include a description of types of behavior which, alone or combined with other behaviors, could constitute sexual harassment, sexual discrimination, and retaliation. The training also shall explain the steps employees may take to report sexual harassment, sexual retaliation, and retaliation, and contain assurances of non-retaliation
20

Case 3:11-cv-00596-WHB-RHW Document 129 Filed 11/22/13 Page 21 of 26
and efforts to keep the matter as confidential as reasonably possible. The training will be repeated (with modifications to ensure its compliance with the law) once annually during each remaining 12month period that the Consent Decree is in effect. b. Each annual training session shall last one (1) hour, and shall generate a registry containing signatures of all persons in attendance for each training. Each registry shall be retained by Defendant Venture, Inc. for the duration of the Consent Decree. c. Each annual training session will be delivered in accord with an outline prepared at least one-week in advance of the training. The outline, all training materials (pamphlets, brochures, agendas, videos), and the registry shall be delivered to the EEOC Birmingham District Office, via first class mail to the attention of the Regional Attorney, within 30 days after each training session. Acceptance or review of these materials by EEOC shall not constitute approval of any of said materials, but will be retained for compliance purposes. 41. Defendant Venture, Inc. shall provide to the EEOC in writing within fifteen (15) business days before the annual training session(s) begin, a listing by payroll number of all current employees at the Mississippi facilities, including managers and supervisors, as of the date of the training. After the training sessions
21

Case 3:11-cv-00596-WHB-RHW Document 129 Filed 11/22/13 Page 22 of 26
have occurred, Defendant Venture, Inc. shall certify to the EEOC in writing 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 sessions; and (ii) a copy of the registry of attendance, which shall include the payroll number and union or management designation of each person in attendance. The payroll listing and the certification shall be delivered to the EEOC, via first-class mail, to the attention of the EEOC Regional Attorney.
VIII. DISPUTE RESOLUTION 42. In the event that any party to the Consent Decree believes that the other party has failed to comply with any provision(s) of the Consent Decree, the complaining party shall notify the other party of the alleged non-compliance within fifteen (15) days of discovery of the alleged non-compliance and shall afford the alleged non-complying party fifteen (15) business days to remedy the noncompliance 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 or satisfied the complaining party that it has complied within fifteen (15) business days, the complaining party may apply to the Court for appropriate relief.
22

Case 3:11-cv-00596-WHB-RHW Document 129 Filed 11/22/13 Page 23 of 26
IX. EEOC REPORTS 43. Defendant Venture, Inc. shall submit to the attention of the Regional Attorney, Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, Birmingham District Office, 1130-22nd Street South, Suite 2000, Birmingham, Alabama 35205 every 180 days following the effective date of the Consent Decree, a report containing the following: (1) the name(s) of all Mississippi employees who filed complaints of, or reported, alleged sexual harassment, sexual discrimination, or retaliation; (2) the supervisor, manager or HR person to whom the complaint or report of alleged sexual harassment, sexual discrimination, or retaliation was made; (3) the date the sexual harassment complaint or report first was made, and (if not to the department of Human Resources/Personnel) the date the complaint or report was received by the department of Human Resources/Personnel; (4) a brief (3 paragraphs at minimum) description of the alleged conduct underlying the complaint or report of sexual harassment, sexual discrimination, or retaliation including whether the alleged harasser or discriminating or retaliating Venture, Inc. employee, was a supervisor, manager or co-worker; (5) a statement that Defendant Venture, Inc. was/was not aware of prior sexual harassment, sexual discrimination, or retaliation reports or allegations of sexual harassment, sexual discrimination, or retaliation, by the accused harasser, alleged discriminating employee, or alleged retaliatory employee; (6) whether the investigation is still pending, and, if concluded,
23

Case 3:11-cv-00596-WHB-RHW Document 129 Filed 11/22/13 Page 24 of 26
Defendant Venture, Inc.’s findings and a description of any personnel (i.e., disciplinary, corrective, performance evaluation) or training action taken in response to the allegation, and/or the findings.
44. Defendant Venture, Inc. should take all reasonable steps to discover information responsive to the preceding six (6) items including, but not limited, surveying supervisors and managers, and reviewing records. If Defendant Venture, Inc. is unaware of any sexual harassment, sexual discrimination, or retaliation, or any reports or allegations of sexual harassment, sexual discrimination, or retaliation, it should so state. The report to the Regional Attorney should be signed and affirmed by the Human Resources Director and/or Chief Executive Officer.
X. COSTS AND ATTORNEY FEES 45. Each party shall bear its own attorney’s fees and costs incurred in this action up to the date of the entry of this Decree.
XI. DURATION OF DECREE 46. The duration of the Consent Decree shall be thirty (30) months from its entry. The Court shall retain jurisdiction over this action for the duration of the Consent Decree, during which Defendant Venture, Inc. or the EEOC may petition this Court for compliance with the Consent Decree. Should the Court determine that any party has not complied with this Consent Decree, appropriate relief,
24

Case 3:11-cv-00596-WHB-RHW Document 129 Filed 11/22/13 Page 25 of 26

including extension of the Consent Decree for such period as may be necessary to remedy its non-compliance, may be ordered. Absent extension, the Consent Decree shall expire by its own terms at the end of thirty (30) months from the date of entry, without further action by the Parties.
The parties agree to the entry of the Consent Decree subject to final approval by the Court.
IT IS SO ORDERED THIS THE 22nd day of November, 2013.

s/William H. Barbour, Jr.

.

WILLIAM H. BARBOUR, JR.

SENIOR UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

ATTORNEYS FOR EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY COMMISSION:

P. DAVID LOPEZ GENERAL COUNSEL

JAMES L. LEE DEPUTY GENERAL COUNSEL

GWENDOLYN YOUNG REAMS ASSOCIATE GENERAL COUNSEL

EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY COMMISSION 131 M Street, N.E., 4th Floor, Room 4NE25N Washington, D. C. 20507

25

Case 3:11-cv-00596-WHB-RHW Document 129 Filed 11/22/13 Page 26 of 26

 
 Case 3:11-cv-00596-WHB-RHW Document 130 Filed 11/22/13 Page 1 of 1

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF MISSISSIPPI
JACKSON DIVISION

EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY COMMISSION

PLAINTIFF

and FRANSECA SANDERS, FRANDRECA SANDERS

PLAINTIFF-INTERVENOR

VS.

CIVIL ACTION NO. 3:11-cv-596-WHB-LRA

VENTURE, INC. d/b/a SAV-A-LOT

DEFENDANT

ORDER OF DISMISSAL In accordance with the Consent Decree entered on November 22, 2013, by which all claims in this litigation were settled, this case is hereby dismissed with prejudice. The Court hereby retains jurisdiction as provided in the Consent Decree. SO ORDERED this the 22nd day of November, 2013.

s/William H. Barbour, Jr. UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

 
 Case 3:11-cv-00596-WHB-RHW Document 8 Filed 12/08/11 Page 1 of 8

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF MISSISSIPPI
JACKSON DIVISION

EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY COMMISSION,
Plaintiff,

v.

VENTURE,INC.,D/B/A SAVE-A-LOT

Defendant.

]

] ] ] ] ] ] ] ] ] ] ] ] ]
] ]

Civil Action No. 3:11-CV-596-WHB-LRA
SECOND AMENDED COMPLAINT JURY TRIAL DEMAND

NATURE OF THE ACTION This is an action under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, as amended, 42 U.S.C. §2000e et seq. (“Title VII”), and Title I of th e Civil Rights Act of 1991, 42 U.S.C. §1981a, t o correct unlawful e mployment practices on the basi s of sex (fem ale) and retaliation, and to provide appropriate relief to Yumeiko Hodge ( “Hodge”) and a class of fe male employees who were adversely affected by such practices. As alle ged with greater particularity in paragraphs six (6) through nine (9) below, De fendant Venture, Inc., d/b/a Sa ve-A-Lot (“Defendant” or “SaveA-Lot”) sexually harassed Hodge and a class of female employees at Defendant’s Mississippi stores, and terminated Hodge in retaliation for her opposition to Defendant’s unlawful conduct.

Case 3:11-cv-00596-WHB-RHW Document 8 Filed 12/08/11 Page 2 of 8
Moreover, as alleged w ith greater particularity below, the Defendant failed to post and keep posted the notices required by Section 711(a) of Title VII, 42 U.S.C. § 2000e-10(a).
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 au thorized and instituted pursuant to Sections 706(f)(1) and (3) of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, as am ended, 42 U.S.C. Sections 2000e-5(f)(1)(“Title VII”), and Section 102 of the Civil Rights Act of 1991, 42 U.S.C. 1981a. 2. The employment practices alleged to be unl awful were committed within the jurisdiction of the United States District Court for the Southern District of Mississippi.
PARTIES 3. Plaintiff, the Equal Employm ent Opportunity Commission (the “Comm ission”), is the agency of the United States of Am erica charged with the adm inistration, interpretation and enforcement of Title VII, and is ex pressly authorized to b ring this action by Sectio n 706(f)(1) and (3) of Title VII, 42 U.S.C. Section 2000e-5(f)(1) and (3). 4. At all relevant tim es, Defendant Em ployer has continuously been a Mississippi corporation doing business in the State of Mississippi and in th e cities of Jackson, Yazoo City, Ridgeland, and Brookhaven, 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 co mmerce within the meaning of Sections 701(b), (g) and (h) of Title VII, 42 U.S.C. §§ 2000e(b), (g) and (h).
STATEMENT OF CLAIMS 6. More than thirty days prior to the institution of this lawsuit, Hodge filed a charge with the Commission alleging violations of Title VII by Defendant Employer. All conditio ns precedent to the institution of this lawsuit have been fulfilled.
2

Case 3:11-cv-00596-WHB-RHW Document 8 Filed 12/08/11 Page 3 of 8
7. Since approximately 2005, Defendant Em ployer has engaged in unlaw ful employment practices at its Mississippi stor es in violation of S ection 703(a) of Title VII, 42 U.S.C. § 2000e2(a)(1) and 2000e-2(a). Specifically, Defendant subjected Hodge and other fe male employees who worked at Defendant’s Mississippi sto res to unwelcom e, degrading and offe nsive sexual conduct, often culminating in adverse employment actions, based on their sex (female) 8. Examples of this conduct include:
a. Jeff Stewart (“Stewart”), Defendant’s Operations Manager, propositioned Hodge and other female employees for sex, including offering them money, higher salaries, and other benefits in exchange for sex;
b. Stewart graphically desc ribed lewd sexual acts to Hodge and other fem ale employees and suggested that they engage in them;
c. Stewart made graphic and lewd sexual comments to Hodge and the other fe male employees such as “h is penis belon gs in an employee’s vagina; “he w anted to f—k” a fem ale employee “real bad”; and he wanted to see an employee naked;
d. Stewart commented about fem ale employees’ “butts” and breasts, invited a female employee to hold his penis while he urinat ed, told a fem ale employee that his penis was bigger than her boyfriend’s, invited a female employee into the bathroom for a sexual encounter, cornered a fe male employee in an office for a sexual encounter, and asked another fem ale employee whether she liked “cream filling” or sex with females;
e. Stewart sexually groped female employees and touched them in their p rivate areas, including sticking his hands down their pants;
f. Stewart took sexual phot ographs and videos of fe male employees’ bodies and then displayed them in the workplace;
3

Case 3:11-cv-00596-WHB-RHW Document 8 Filed 12/08/11 Page 4 of 8
g. Stewart engaged in sexually graphic de monstrations and gestures, including grabbing or pointing to hi s penis, pointing to female employee’s private parts, and stuffing food in his groin area to simulate a sexual organ;
h. Stewart’s conduct was open and notor ious and Defe ndant, including its supervisors, and managers, was aware of it;
i. Women who objected to or rejected Stewart’s sexual advances and comm ents, or refused to engage in them, were threatened by Stewart with term ination, reduction in pay, and other tangible changes in their conditions of employment;
j. Many female employees were afraid to complain about Stewart’s conduct because Stewart was intim idating and had a reputati on for penalizing empl oyees who resisted, complained about, or challenged him;
k. Some female employees complained to Defendant, including its supervisors and managers, about Stewart’s conduct, but nothing was done to stop it;
l. Many female employees, aware that nothing had been done about Stewart’s conduct and complaints to Defendant about it, did not believe Defendant would stop the conduct even if they complained;
m. Defendant failed to take prompt or effective preventive, corrective or rem edial action;
n. Employee protests directly to Stewart did not stop Stewart’s unlawful conduct; o. Stewart either took or thr eatened to take adverse act ions against employees who refused to acquiesce to his sexual demands, conduct and comments; and p. Stewart’s conduct was unwanted, severe and pervasive, and fe male employees’ were offended by it.
4

Case 3:11-cv-00596-WHB-RHW Document 8 Filed 12/08/11 Page 5 of 8
9. On or about August 2009, Defe ndant Employer engaged in unlawful e mployment practices at its Mississi ppi stores by retaliati ng against Hodge in viola tion of Section 704(a) of Title VII, 42 U.S.C. § 2000e-3(a).
a. The Commission incorporates by reference paragraph nine (9) of this Complaint. b. Hodge complained to Defendant’s Store Manager, Sam Whitehead (“Whitehead), about Stewart’s sexually harassing conduct. c. Shorty after Hodge reported the harassm ent to Whitehead, Defendant term inated Hodge allegedly because of a m inor verbal disput e she had with a co-worker. In contrast, no action was taken against the co-worker although she instigated the dispute. d. Defendant’s decision to term inate Hodge was in retaliation for her having engaged in activity. e. Whitehead later told Hodge that the incident was not her fault. Nevertheless, she was not reinstated. 10. Since at least June, 2011, Defendant Save-A-Lot has failed, in violation of Section 711(a) and (b) of Title VII, 42 U.S.C. § 2000e-10(a) and (b), to post and keep posted notices which have been prepared or approved by the Comm ission setting forth excerpts f rom or summaries of the pertinent provisions of Title VII and information pertinent to the filing of a charge or complaint. a. During an onsite investigation at Defendant’s premises on June 2, 2011, an EEOC investigator saw that Defendant did not have posted in conspicuous places where notices to employees and applicants for employment are customarily posted, the required notices. 11. The effect of the practices com plained of in paragraph(s) six (6) through ten (10) above has been to deprive Hodge and/or a class of female employees who worked at Defendant’s Mississippi stores of equal employment opportunities and, otherwise, adversely affect their status
5

Case 3:11-cv-00596-WHB-RHW Document 8 Filed 12/08/11 Page 6 of 8
as employees because o f their s ex (female) and/or in retaliation for o pposition to acts m ade unlawful by Title VII. 12. The unlawful employment practices complained of in paragraphs six (6) through ten (10) above were intentional. 13. The unlawful employm ent practices complained of in paragraphs six (6) through ten (10) above were done with m alice or w ith reckless indifference to the fe derally protected rights of Hodge and other female employees.
PRAYER FOR RELIEF Wherefore, the Commission respectfully requests that this Court: A. Grant a permanent injunction enjoining Defendant Save-A-Lot, its officers, agents,
servants, employees, attorneys, and all person s in active concert or participation with them, from engaging in sexual harassm ent, and any other em ployment practices which discriminate on the basis of se x, and from engaging in retaliation for opposition to employment practices which discriminate on the basis of sex. B. Order Defendant Save-A-Lot to institu te and carry ou t policies, practices, and programs which provide equal em ployment opportunities for women and for persons who oppose conduct prohibited by Title VII, a nd which eradicate the effects of its past and present unlawful employment practices. C. Order Defendant Save-A-Lot to m ake whole Hodge, and the class of fe male employees, by providing, as appropriate, appropriate backpay with prejudgm ent interest, in amounts to be determined at trial, and other affirmative relief necessary to eradicate the effects of its unlawful e mployment practices including, but not lim ited to, front pay.
6

Case 3:11-cv-00596-WHB-RHW Document 8 Filed 12/08/11 Page 7 of 8
D. Order Defendant Save-A-Lot to make whole Hodge and class of female employees by providing, as appropriate, com pensation for past and future nonpecuniary losses resulting from the unlawful practices com plained of in paragraphs six (6) through nine (9) above, including emotional pain, suffering, inconvenience, loss of enjoyment of life, and humiliation, in amounts to be determined at trial.
E. Order Defendant Save-A-Lot to pay to Hodge and the class of fe male employees punitive damages for its m alicious and reckless conduct described in paragraphs six (6) through ten (10) above, in amounts to be determined at trial.
F. Order Defendant Save-A-Lot to post and k eep posted notices in accord ance with the provisions of Section 711(a) of Title V II, 42 U.S.C. § 2000e-10(a) and ass ess appropriate civil fines against the D efendant pursuant to Section 711(b) of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, 42 U.S.C. § 2000e-10(b).
G. Grant such further relief as the Court deems necessary and proper in the public interest.
H. Award the Commission its costs of this action. JURY TRIAL DEMAND
The Commission requests a jury trial on all questions of fact raised by its complaint. Date: December 8, 2011
RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED,
P. David Lopez General Counsel James L. Lee Deputy General Counsel Gwendolyn Young Reams Associate General Counsel 7

Case 3:11-cv-00596-WHB-RHW Document 8 Filed 12/08/11 Page 8 of 8

EQUAL
Ridge 1130 Birm Telephone: Facsim

U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission 131 M. Street E Washington, DC 20507

C. EMANUEL SMITH (MS Bar # 7473) Regional Attorney

/s/

Julie Bean

JULIE BEAN (DC Bar #433292)

Supervisory Trial Attorney

Julie.Bean@eeoc.gov

EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY COMMISSION, Birmingham District Office
Park Place, Suite 2000 22nd Street, South ingham, Alabama 35205
(205) 212-2045 ile: (205) 212-2041

8

 
 Case: 3:11-cv-596 As of: 01/29/2014 11:32 PM CST 1 of 15
CLOSED,JURY,RHW
U.S. District Court Southern District of Mississippi (Northern (Jackson)) CIVIL DOCKET FOR CASE #: 3:11−cv−00596−WHB−RHW

Equal Employment Opportunity Commission v. Venture, Inc. Assigned to: District Judge William H. Barbour, Jr Referred to: Magistrate Judge Robert H. Walker Cause: 42:2000 Job Discrimination (Sex)
Plaintiff

Date Filed: 09/26/2011 Date Terminated: 11/22/2013 Jury Demand: Both Nature of Suit: 442 Civil Rights: Jobs Jurisdiction: U.S. Government Plaintiff

Equal Employment Opportunity Commission

represented by Gerald Miller U.S. EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY COMMISSION−Birmingham Birmingham District Office Ridge Park Place 1130 − 22nd St., South, Ste. 2000 Birmingham, AL 30205−2886 205/212−2047 Fax: 205/212−2041 Email: gerald.miller@eeoc.gov LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

Julie Steptoe Bean EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY COMMISSION − Birmingham Birmingham District Office Ridge Park Place, Suite 2000 1130 22nd Street South Birmingham, AL 35205−2881 205/212−2076 Fax: 205/212−2105 Email: julie.bean@eeoc.gov LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

C. Emanuel Smith EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY COMMISSION − Birmingham Birmingham District Office Ridge Park Place, Suite 2000 1130 22nd Street South Birmingham, AL 35205−2881 205/212−2131 Fax: 205/212−2041 Email: emanuel.smith@eeoc.gov ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

Gwendolyn Young Reams EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY COMMISSION − Washington 131 M Street, NE Washington, DC 20507 202/663−7028 Fax: 202/663−7045 Email: gwendolyn.reams@eeoc.gov ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

Case: 3:11-cv-596 As of: 01/29/2014 11:32 PM CST 2 of 15

James L. Lee EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY COMMISSION − Washington 131 M Street, NE Washington, DC 20507 Email: James.Lee@eeoc.gov ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
Maneesh Varma EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY COMMISSION − Birmingham Birmingham District Office Ridge Park Place, Suite 2000 1130 22nd Street South Birmingham, AL 35205−2881 205/212−2044 Fax: 205/212−2041 Email: maneesh.varma@eeoc.gov ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
Steven Lee Murray U.S. EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY COMMISSION−Birmingham Birmingham District Office Ridge Park Place 1130 − 22nd St., South, Ste. 2000 Birmingham, AL 30205−2886 205/212−2043 Fax: 205/212−2105 Email: steven.murray@eeoc.gov ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

V. Intervenor Plaintiff Francesca Sanders

represented by Edward Sanders DAVIDSON, BOWIE, SANDERS, PLLC P. O. Box 321405 2506 Lakeland Drive Suite 501 Flowood, MS 39232 601/932−0028 Fax: 601/932−0115 Email: edwardlloydsanders@gmail.com ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
Michael Todd Crowley THE LAW OFFICE OF MICHAEL TODD CROWLEY, PLLC P. O. Box 731 Clinton, MS 39060−0731 601/594−5296 Fax: 601/510−9374 Email: mcrowley@hotmail.com ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

V. Defendant

Case: 3:11-cv-596 As of: 01/29/2014 11:32 PM CST 3 of 15

Venture, Inc. doing business as Save−A−Lot

represented by Timothy M. Threadgill BUTLER, SNOW, O'MARA, STEVENS &CANNADA P. O. Box 6010 Ridgeland, MS 39158−6010 (601) 948−5711 Fax: (601) 985−4500 Email: tim.threadgill@butlersnow.com LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

Robert T. Higginbotham , Jr. MASSEY, HIGGINBOTHAM, VISE &PHILLIPS, PA 3003 Lakeland Cove, Suite E Flowood, MS 39232 601/420−2200 Fax: 601/420−2202 Email: bhigginbotham@mhvplaw.com ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

Movant Frandreca Sanders

Movant Jasmine Crozier

Date Filed 09/26/2011 10/25/2011 10/25/2011 10/26/2011
10/26/2011
11/04/2011
11/18/2011 11/22/2011 11/30/2011

# Docket Text
1 COMPLAINT with JURY DEMAND against Venture, Inc., filed by Equal Employment Opportunity Commission. (Attachments: # 1 Civil Cover Sheet).(EJS) (Entered: 09/26/2011)
2 MOTION to Intervene by Francesa Sanders (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit A, # 2 Exhibit B)(Sanders, Edward) (Entered: 10/25/2011)
3 MEMORANDUM in Support re 2 MOTION to Intervene filed by Francesa Sanders (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit A)(Sanders, Edward) (Entered: 10/25/2011)
DOCKET ANNOTATION as to # 2 3 Local Rule 7 requires that all supporting exhibits to a document be denominated by an exhibit letter or number and a meaningful description. For example Exhibit 1, Affidavit of John Doe. Attorney is advised to follow this rule in future filings. (cwl) (Entered: 10/26/2011)
TEXT−ONLY ORDER. Putative Plaintiff is directed to file a statement in compliance with L.U.Civ.R. 7(b)(10) regarding the 2 Motion to Intervene. Signed by Magistrate Judge Linda R. Anderson on 10/26/2011. NO FURTHER WRITTEN ORDER WILL BE ISSUED. (WG) (Entered: 10/26/2011)
TEXT ONLY ORDER granting 2 Motion to Intervene filed by Francesca Sanders. The Clerk is directed to make the appropriate revisions to the docket. NO WRITTEN ORDER TO FOLLOW. Signed by Magistrate Judge Linda R. Anderson on 11/4/2011. (ACF) (Entered: 11/04/2011)
4 AMENDED COMPLAINT against Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, filed by Equal Employment Opportunity Commission.(Bean, Julie) (Entered: 11/18/2011)
5 REQUEST FOR WAIVER of Service sent to Mr. Dan Myers, Registered Agent for Venture, Inc. on 11/22/2011 by Equal Employment Opportunity Commission. Waiver of Service due by 12/27/2011 (Bean, Julie) (Entered: 11/22/2011)
6 NOTICE of Appearance by Steven Lee Murray on behalf of Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (Murray, Steven) (Entered: 11/30/2011)

Case: 3:11-cv-596 As of: 01/29/2014 11:32 PM CST 4 of 15

11/30/2011 12/08/2011
12/09/2011 12/14/2011
12/15/2011
12/15/2011 01/03/2012 01/04/2012
01/04/2012 01/05/2012 01/09/2012 01/12/2012 01/12/2012 02/01/2012 02/01/2012
02/06/2012
02/09/2012
02/29/2012
03/07/2012

7 NOTICE of Appearance by Gerald Miller on behalf of Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (Miller, Gerald) (Entered: 11/30/2011)
8 AMENDED COMPLAINT Second Amended Complaint against Venture, Inc., filed by Equal Employment Opportunity Commission.(Miller, Gerald) (Entered: 12/08/2011)
9 Summons Issued as to Venture, Inc.. (cwl) (Entered: 12/09/2011)
10 SUMMONS Returned Executed by Equal Employment Opportunity Commission Venture, Inc. served on 12/12/2011, answer due 1/3/2012. (Miller, Gerald) (Entered: 12/14/2011)
DOCKET ANNOTATION as to # 10 A return on summons/subpoena should not be filed without the first page, as issued, preceding the return. Attorney is directed to refile. (cwl) (Entered: 12/15/2011)
11 SUMMONS Returned Executed by Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (Bean, Julie) (Entered: 12/15/2011)
12 MOTION for Extension of Time to File Responsive Pleading to Second Amended Complaint by Venture, Inc. (Threadgill, Timothy) (Entered: 01/03/2012)
TEXT−ONLY ORDER granting unopposed 12 Motion for Extension of Time to File Responsive Pleading to Second Amended Complaint. Signed by Magistrate Judge Linda R. Anderson on 1/04/2012. NO FURTHER WRITTEN ORDER WILL BE ISSUED. (WG) (Entered: 01/04/2012)
Set/Reset Deadlines: Venture, Inc. answer due 1/12/2012. (WG) (Entered: 01/04/2012)
13 Intervenor COMPLAINT against Venture, Inc., filed by Francesa Sanders.(Crowley, Michael) (Entered: 01/05/2012)
14 Summons Issued as to Venture, Inc.. (cwl) (Entered: 01/09/2012)
15 Affirmative Defenses and ANSWER to 8 Amended Complaint by Venture, Inc..(Threadgill, Timothy) (Entered: 01/12/2012)
16 NOTICE of Appearance by Robert T. Higginbotham, Jr on behalf of Venture, Inc. (Higginbotham, Robert) (Entered: 01/12/2012)
17 MOTION to Strike 15 Answer to Amended Complaint by Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (Miller, Gerald) (Entered: 02/01/2012)
18 MEMORANDUM in Support re 17 MOTION to Strike 15 Answer to Amended Complaint filed by Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (Miller, Gerald) (Entered: 02/01/2012)
19 WAIVER OF SERVICE Returned Executed by Francesa Sanders. Venture, Inc. waiver sent on 1/13/2012, answer due 3/13/2012. (Crowley, Michael) (Entered: 02/06/2012)
20 Rule 16(a) Initial Order Telephonic Case Management Conference set for 3/19/2012 02:00 PM before Magistrate Judge Linda R. Anderson (WG) (Entered: 02/09/2012)
21 MOTION to Stay Proceedings, MOTION to Continue by Venture, Inc. (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit 1 − correspondence and proposed Agreed Order)(Higginbotham, Robert) (Entered: 02/29/2012)
22 ORDER granting 21 Motion to Stay Proceedings; granting 21 Motion to Continue. No response to the pending Motion to Strike will need to be filed and the Rule 16(a) conference scheduled for March 19, 2012, including its requirements, are continued until such further Order of this Court. The parties shall conduct their voluntary mediation within forty−five (45) days of the entry of this Order and the parties shall report to the Court within three (3) days following the medication the results thereof. Signed by Magistrate Judge Linda R. Anderson on 3−6−12 (Lewis, Nijah) (Entered: 03/07/2012)

Case: 3:11-cv-596 As of: 01/29/2014 11:32 PM CST 5 of 15

03/22/2012 05/03/2012 05/07/2012 06/12/2012
06/12/2012
06/12/2012 06/13/2012
06/20/2012 06/20/2012 06/21/2012 06/21/2012
06/21/2012 06/21/2012 06/22/2012 06/22/2012 07/02/2012

23 STATUS REPORT on Mediation by Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (Miller, Gerald) (Entered: 03/22/2012)
TEXT ONLY ORDER LIFTING STAY. The Court will enter new scheduling deadlines. NO WRITTEN ORDER TO FOLLOW. Signed by Magistrate Judge Linda R. Anderson on 5/3/2012. (ACF) (Entered: 05/03/2012)
24 Rule 16(a) Initial Order Telephonic Case Management Conference set for 6/12/2012 09:00 AM before Magistrate Judge Linda R. Anderson (WG) (Entered: 05/07/2012)
Minute Entry for proceedings held before Magistrate Judge Linda R. Anderson: Telephonic Case Management Conference held on 6/12/2012. Participants: Julie Bean, Gerald Miller, Robert Higginbotham, Jr., Edwaqrd Sanders and Michael Todd Crowley. A Case Management Order will be entered by the Court. (WG) (Entered: 06/12/2012)
TEXT−ONLY ORDER re 17 MOTION to Strike 15 Answer to Amended Complaint filed by Equal Employment Opportunity Commission. Response to 17 MOTION to Strike due 7/02/2012. Signed by Magistrate Judge Linda R. Anderson on 6/12/2012. NO FURTHER WRITTEN ORDER WILL BE ISSUED. (WG) (Entered: 06/12/2012)
Set/Reset Deadlines as to 17 MOTION to Strike 15 Answer to Amended Complaint. Responses due by 7/2/2012 (WG) (Entered: 06/12/2012)
25 CASE MANAGEMENT ORDER Disclosure due by 6/22/2012 Motions for Amended Pleadings due by 7/31/2012 Motions for Joinder of Parties due by 7/31/2012 Designate Experts Plaintiff Deadline due by 10/12/2012 Designate Experts for Defendant Deadline due by 12/14/2012 Discovery due by 3/15/2013 Motions due by 4/15/2013 Pretrial Conference set for 9/13/2013 at a more definite time to be later set by the Court before District Judge William H. Barbour Jr. Jury Trial set during two−week trial period commencing 10/1/2013 09:00 AM in Courtroom 4B (Jackson) Barbour before District Judge William H. Barbour Jr. Signed by Magistrate Judge Linda R. Anderson on 6/13/2012 (WG) (Entered: 06/13/2012)
26 NOTICE of Service of Pre−Discovery Disclosure by Venture, Inc. (Higginbotham, Robert) (Entered: 06/20/2012)
27 NOTICE of Service of Pre−Discovery Disclosure by Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (Miller, Gerald) (Entered: 06/20/2012)
28 NOTICE of Service of Request for Production, Request for Admissions, and Interrogatories by Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (Miller, Gerald) (Entered: 06/21/2012)
DOCKET ANNOTATION as to # 28 : This document notices service of multiple forms of discovery. Each event should be separately docketed. The same PDF document may be used for all entries. Attorney is advised to docket additional events as needed. These events are found in the electronic docketing system under Discovery Documents. (cwl) (Entered: 06/21/2012)
29 NOTICE of Service of Request for Admissions by Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (Miller, Gerald) (Entered: 06/21/2012)
30 NOTICE of Service of Request for Production by Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (Miller, Gerald) (Entered: 06/21/2012)
31 NOTICE of Service of Request for Admissions by Francesa Sanders (Sanders, Edward) (Entered: 06/22/2012)
32 NOTICE of Service of Initial Disclosure by Francesa Sanders (Sanders, Edward) (Entered: 06/22/2012)
33 RESPONSE in Opposition re 17 MOTION to Strike 15 Answer to Amended Complaint filed by Venture, Inc. (Higginbotham, Robert) (Entered: 07/02/2012)

Case: 3:11-cv-596 As of: 01/29/2014 11:32 PM CST 6 of 15

07/03/2012 07/03/2012 07/05/2012 07/05/2012 07/11/2012 07/18/2012 07/18/2012 07/18/2012 07/18/2012 07/23/2012 08/06/2012 08/06/2012
08/07/2012
08/08/2012 08/13/2012 08/14/2012 08/14/2012 08/14/2012

34 NOTICE of Service of Interrogatories by Venture, Inc. (Higginbotham, Robert) (Entered: 07/03/2012)
35 NOTICE of Service of Request for Production by Venture, Inc. (Higginbotham, Robert) (Entered: 07/03/2012)
36 NOTICE of Service of Interrogatories by Venture, Inc. (Higginbotham, Robert) (Entered: 07/05/2012)
37 NOTICE of Service of Request for Production by Venture, Inc. (Higginbotham, Robert) (Entered: 07/05/2012)
38 ANSWER to 13 Intervenor Complaint by Venture, Inc..(Higginbotham, Robert) (Entered: 07/11/2012)
39 NOTICE of Service of Response to Interrogatories by Venture, Inc. (Higginbotham, Robert) (Entered: 07/18/2012)
40 NOTICE of Service of Response to Request for Production by Venture, Inc. (Higginbotham, Robert) (Entered: 07/18/2012)
41 NOTICE of Service of Response to Request for Admissions by Venture, Inc. (Higginbotham, Robert) (Entered: 07/18/2012)
42 NOTICE of Service of Response to Request for Admissions by Venture, Inc. (Higginbotham, Robert) (Entered: 07/18/2012)
43 AMENDED ANSWER to 8 Amended Complaint by Venture, Inc. (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit 1 − Currently Identified Eligible Claimants)(Higginbotham, Robert) (Entered: 07/23/2012)
44 MOTION for Extension of Time to File /Serve Discovery Responses by Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (Miller, Gerald) (Entered: 08/06/2012)
45 MEMORANDUM in Support re 44 MOTION for Extension of Time to File /Serve Discovery Responses filed by Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit 1− EEOC's Interrogatories, # 2 Exhibit 2− EEOC's Requests for Production, # 3 Exhibit 3− Defendant's Responses to Interrogatories, # 4 Exhibit 4− Defendant's Responses to Requests for Production, # 5 Exhibit 5− 7−31−12 e−mail to Higginbotham, # 6 Exhibit 6− 8−1−12 Letter to Defendant's Counsel, # 7 Exhibit 7− 8−1−12 e−mail to Miller, # 8 Exhibit 8− 8−1−12 e−mail to Higginbotham, # 9 Exhibit 9− 8−2−12 e−mail to Miller, # 10 Exhibit 10− 8−2−12 e−mail to Higginbotham, # 11 Exhibit 11− 8−3−12 letter to Bean and Miller, # 12 Exhibit 12− 8−6−12 e−mail to Miller, # 13 Exhibit 13− 8−6−12 e−mail to Higginbotham)(Miller, Gerald) (Entered: 08/06/2012)
TEXT−ONLY ORDER. Plaintiff is directed to file a statement in compliance with L.U.Civ.R. 7(b)(10) regarding the 44 Motion for Extension of Time to File/Serve Discovery Responses. Signed by Magistrate Judge Linda R. Anderson on 8/07/2012. NO FURTHER WRITTEN ORDER WILL BE ISSUED. (WG) (Entered: 08/07/2012)
46 NOTICE of Defendant's Opposition to Plaintiff's Motion for Extension of Time by Equal Employment Opportunity Commission re 44 MOTION for Extension of Time to File /Serve Discovery Responses (Miller, Gerald) (Entered: 08/08/2012)
47 ORDER denying 17 Motion of Plaintiff to Strike or, in the alternative, to Dismiss Defendant's Affirmative Defenses Signed by District Judge William H. Barbour, Jr on 8−13−12 (Lewis, Nijah) (Entered: 08/13/2012)
48 NOTICE of Service of Plaintiff Sanders' Response to Interrogatories by Francesa Sanders (Sanders, Edward) (Entered: 08/14/2012)
49 NOTICE of Service of Plaintiff Sanders' Request for Production by Francesa Sanders (Sanders, Edward) (Entered: 08/14/2012)
50 NOTICE of Service of Plaintiff Sanders−Corr #49 Response to Request for Production by Francesa Sanders (Sanders, Edward) (Entered: 08/14/2012)

Case: 3:11-cv-596 As of: 01/29/2014 11:32 PM CST 7 of 15

08/17/2012 08/17/2012
08/21/2012
08/22/2012 08/27/2012 08/30/2012 08/30/2012
08/30/2012 08/31/2012
08/31/2012 08/31/2012 08/31/2012

51 First MOTION to Compel Discovery by Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit Good Faith Certificate, # 2 Affidavit Declaration of Gerald Miller)(Miller, Gerald) (Entered: 08/17/2012)
52 MEMORANDUM in Support re 51 First MOTION to Compel Discovery filed by Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit 1− EEOC First Interrogatories, # 2 Exhibit 2− EEOC First Req for Prod, # 3 Exhibit 3− Def Responses to Interrogatories, # 4 Exhibit 4− Def Responses to RFP, # 5 Exhibit 5− 7/31/12 e−mail, # 6 Exhibit 6− 8/1/12 letter, # 7 Exhibit 7− 8/1/12 e−mail, # 8 Exhibit 8− 8/1/12 e−mail, # 9 Exhibit 9− 8/2/12 e−mail, # 10 Exhibit 10− 8/2/12 e−mail, # 11 Exhibit 11− 8/3/12 letter, # 12 Exhibit 12− 8/6/12 e−mail, # 13 Exhibit 13− 8/6/12 e−mail, # 14 Exhibit 14− 8/15/12 e−mail, # 15 Exhibit 15− 8/15/12 e−mail, # 16 Exhibit 16− 8/16/12 e−mail)(Miller, Gerald) (Entered: 08/17/2012)
53 RESPONSE in Opposition re 44 MOTION for Extension of Time to File /Serve Discovery Responses filed by Venture, Inc. (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit 1 − Letter re: EEOC's post−Complaint claimant solicitation process of Venture employees., # 2 Exhibit 2 − Freedom of Information letter from Venture to EEOC., # 3 Exhibit 3 − Email re: EEOC giving 1 business days notice to take Ventures documents away., # 4 Exhibit 4 − Email re: EEOC providing EEOC less than 3 hours to respond to a discovery issue.)(Higginbotham, Robert) (Entered: 08/21/2012)
54 NOTICE of Service of Second Request for Admissions by Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (Miller, Gerald) (Entered: 08/22/2012)
55 REPLY to Response to Motion re 44 MOTION for Extension of Time to File /Serve Discovery Responses, 53 Response in Opposition to Motion,, filed by Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (Miller, Gerald) (Entered: 08/27/2012)
56 MOTION for Sanctions by Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit Good Faith Certificate, # 2 Affidavit Declaration of Gerald L. Miller)(Miller, Gerald) (Entered: 08/30/2012)
57 MEMORANDUM in Support re 56 MOTION for Sanctions filed by Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit 1− EEOC's First Interrogatories, # 2 Exhibit 2− EEOC's First Req for Prod, # 3 Exhibit 3−Responses to Interrogatories, # 4 Exhibit 4−Responses to Req for Prod, # 5 Exhibit 5− 7/31/12 e−mail, # 6 Exhibit 6− 8/1/12 letter, # 7 Exhibit 7− 8/1/12 letter, # 8 Exhibit 8− 8/1/12 e−mail, # 9 Exhibit 9− 8/2/12 e−mail, # 10 Exhibit 10− 8/2/12 e−mail, # 11 Exhibit 11− 8/3/12 letter, # 12 Exhibit 12− 8/6/12 e−mail, # 13 Exhibit 13−8/6/12 e−mail, # 14 Exhibit 14− 8/15/12 e−mail, # 15 Exhibit 15− 8/15/12 e−mail, # 16 Exhibit 16− 8/16/12 e−mail, # 17 Exhibit 17− 5/25/12 letter, # 18 Exhibit 18− 7/31/12 deposition notices, # 19 Exhibit 19− 8/3/12 Amended Deposition Notice, # 20 Exhibit 20− 8/23/12 Deposition Notices, # 21 Exhibit 21− 8/24/12 letter)(Miller, Gerald) (Entered: 08/30/2012)
58 MOTION to Compel by Venture, Inc. (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit A − Good Faith Certificate)(Higginbotham, Robert) (Entered: 08/30/2012)
59 RESPONSE in Opposition re 51 First MOTION to Compel Discovery filed by Venture, Inc. (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit 1 − EEOCs claimant solicitation letters, # 2 Exhibit 2 − Freedom of Information request, # 3 Exhibit 3 − Email re: giving Venture 1 business days notice to pick up and take away a clients files, # 4 Exhibit 4 − Email re: giving Venture 2 hours and 40 minutes to respond, # 5 Exhibit 5 − Email re: no good−faith discovery by the EEOC)(Higginbotham, Robert) (Entered: 08/31/2012)
60 MOTION to Expedite Hearing of All Pending Motions by Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit 1− Good Faith Certificate, # 2 Exhibit 2−Declaration of Gerald Miller)(Miller, Gerald) (Entered: 08/31/2012)
61 MEMORANDUM in Support re 60 MOTION to Expedite Hearing of All Pending Motions filed by Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (Miller, Gerald) (Entered: 08/31/2012)
62 REPLY to Response to Motion re 53 Response in Opposition to Motion, re 44 MOTION for Extension of Time to File /Serve Discovery Responses filed by Equal

Case: 3:11-cv-596 As of: 01/29/2014 11:32 PM CST 8 of 15

09/05/2012 09/05/2012
09/05/2012 09/06/2012 09/06/2012
09/06/2012 09/07/2012 09/10/2012
09/11/2012

Employment Opportunity Commission (Miller, Gerald) Modified on 8/31/2012 to reflect linkage to motion (cwl). (Entered: 08/31/2012)
63 NOTICE to Take Deposition of Save−A−Lot Food Stores, Ltd. by Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (Miller, Gerald) (Entered: 09/05/2012)
64 MOTION for Summary Judgment by Venture, Inc. (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit 1 − Charge of Discrimination filed by Hodge, # 2 Exhibit 1a − Statement that Hodge was terminated for fighting with co−workers and being unruly, # 3 Exhibit 2 − Notice of Charge of Discrimination to Save−A−Lot/Venture, # 4 Exhibit 3 − Requests for information by EEOC to Venture, dated 7/2/10 and 9/2/10, # 5 Exhibit 4 − Pre−Determination Letter by EEOC giving Venture until 6/14/11 to submit evidence, dated 6/6/11, # 6 Exhibit 5 − Determination Letter by EEOC to Venture, dated 6/10/11, # 7 Exhibit 6 − EEOC letter dated 7/7/11 unilaterally declaring that so−called efforts to conciliate this charge failed, # 8 Exhibit 7 − EEOC letter dated 9/1/11 − after the EEOC allegedly attempted to reopen its so−called efforts to conciliate this charge, it again closes conciliation, # 9 Exhibit 8 − Post−lawsuit Claimant Solicitation Letters, # 10 Exhibit 8a − EEOCs recently produced Currently Identified Eligible Claimants list, # 11 Exhibit 9 − Affidavit of Robert T. Higginbotham, Jr., # 12 Exhibit 10 − FOIA request, dated 2/21/12, # 13 Exhibit 11 − Unanswered discovery requests to the EEOC, dated 7/3/12 and due 8/9/12)(Higginbotham, Robert) (Entered: 09/05/2012)
65 MEMORANDUM in Support re 64 MOTION for Summary Judgment filed by Venture, Inc. (Higginbotham, Robert) (Entered: 09/05/2012)
66 RESPONSE in Opposition re 56 MOTION for Sanctions filed by Venture, Inc. (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit 1 − Correspondence and Notice re: scheduling of depositions)(Higginbotham, Robert) (Entered: 09/06/2012)
67 MOTION to Stay Proceedings, MOTION for Protective Order by Venture, Inc. (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit 1 − Notice of Deposition of Save−A−Lot Food Stores, Ltd., # 2 Exhibit 1a − Second Notice of Deposition of Save−A−Lot Food Stores, Ltd., # 3 Exhibit 2 − Subpoena for Save−A−Lot Food Stores, Ltd., # 4 Exhibit 3 − Subpoena for Best Western North Jackson, # 5 Exhibit 4 − Subpoena for Jeff Stewart, # 6 Exhibit 5 − Notice of Deposition of Venture, Inc., # 7 Exhibit 6 − Notice of Deposition of Dan Myers, # 8 Exhibit 7 − Notice of Deposition of Jeff Stewart, # 9 Exhibit 8 − Notice of Deposition of Sam Whitehead, # 10 Exhibit 9 − Notice of Deposition of Robert Wilkins, # 11 Exhibit 10 − Notice of Deposition of Christopher Fleming, # 12 Exhibit 11 − Notice of Deposition of LeaAnna Sanders, # 13 Exhibit 12 − Requests for Admissions served on Venture, # 14 Exhibit 13 − Good Faith Certificate, # 15 Exhibit 14 − Correspondence re: scheduling of depositions)(Higginbotham, Robert) (Entered: 09/06/2012)
68 MEMORANDUM in Support re 67 MOTION to Stay Proceedings MOTION for Protective Order filed by Venture, Inc. (Higginbotham, Robert) (Entered: 09/06/2012)
Minute Entry for proceedings held before Magistrate Judge Linda R. Anderson: Telephone Conference held on 9/7/2012. Participants: Julie Bean, Geral Miller, Steven Murray, Timothy Threadgill, Robert Higginbotham, Edward Sanders and Todd Crowley. Court discussed pending motions 44 and 58 with counsel. Order forthcoming. (WG) (Entered: 09/11/2012)
69 ORDER re: telephonic status conference conducted 9/7/2012. The Court denied the EEOC's 44 Motion for Extension of Time to Respond to Discovery and dismissed Defendant's 58 Motion to Compel as moot. The attorneys are to engage in a good faith conference regarding the issues contained in the EEOC's motion to compel. Thereafter, on or before 9/19/2012, the EEOC shall file a supplemented motion to compel containing the issues remaining in controversy. Briefing on the pending motions shall be as provided in the local rules, unless additional time is requested. Until a ruling is entered on Defendant's Motion to Stay, all depositions and subpoenas are temporarily stayed. Signed by Magistrate Judge Linda R. Anderson on 9/10/2012. (ACF) (Entered: 09/10/2012)
70 NOTICE of Service of Response to Interrogatories by Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (Miller, Gerald) (Entered: 09/11/2012)

Case: 3:11-cv-596 As of: 01/29/2014 11:32 PM CST 9 of 15

09/11/2012 09/13/2012 09/13/2012 09/14/2012 09/17/2012
09/19/2012 09/20/2012 09/20/2012 09/20/2012
09/24/2012
09/24/2012 10/01/2012 10/01/2012

71 NOTICE of Service of Response to Request for Production by Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (Miller, Gerald) (Entered: 09/11/2012)
72 Emergency MOTION for Discovery and Enlargement of Time to Respond to Defendant's Motion for Summary Judgment by Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit 1− Declaration of Gerald L. Miller)(Miller, Gerald) (Entered: 09/13/2012)
73 MEMORANDUM in Support re 72 Emergency MOTION for Discovery and Enlargement of Time to Respond to Defendant's Motion for Summary Judgment Pursuant to FRCP 56(d) filed by Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (Miller, Gerald) (Entered: 09/13/2012)
74 RESPONSE in Opposition re 64 MOTION for Summary Judgment filed by Francesa Sanders (Sanders, Edward) (Entered: 09/14/2012)
75 ORDER re 72 Emergency MOTION for Discovery and Enlargement of Time to Respond to Defendant's Motion for Summary Judgment filed by Equal Employment Opportunity Commission. Plaintiff is hereby presently relieved of its duty to respond to the pending Motion for Summary Judgment. A deadline for responding to the Motion for Summary Judgment will be ordered after the subject Rule 56(d) Motion has been fully briefed and considered by the Court. Signed by District Judge William H. Barbour, Jr on 9−17−2012 (Lewis, Nijah) (Entered: 09/17/2012)
76 Joint MOTION for Extension of Time to File Supplemental Motion to Compel by Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (Miller, Gerald) (Entered: 09/19/2012)
77 NOTICE of Service of Response to Request for Admissions by Venture, Inc. (Higginbotham, Robert) (Entered: 09/20/2012)
78 RESPONSE in Opposition re 67 MOTION to Stay Proceedings MOTION for Protective Order filed by Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (Miller, Gerald) (Entered: 09/20/2012)
79 MEMORANDUM in Opposition re 67 MOTION to Stay Proceedings MOTION for Protective Order filed by Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit 1− EEOC's First Interrogatories, # 2 Exhibit 2− EEOC's First Requests for Production, # 3 Exhibit 3− Responses to Interrogatories, # 4 Exhibit 4− Responses to Requests for Production, # 5 Exhibit 5− 7/31/12 e−mail, # 6 Exhibit 6− 8/1/12 letter, # 7 Exhibit 7− 8/1/12 letter, # 8 Exhibit 8− 8/1/12 e−mail, # 9 Exhibit 9− 8/2/12 e−mail, # 10 Exhibit 10− 8/2/12 e−mail, # 11 Exhibit 11− 8/3/12 letter, # 12 Exhibit 12− 8/6/12 e−mail, # 13 Exhibit 13− 8/6/12 e−mail, # 14 Exhibit 14− 8/15/12 e−mail, # 15 Exhibit 15− 8/15/12 e−mail, # 16 Exhibit 16− 8/16/12 e−mail, # 17 Exhibit 17− 5/25/12 e−mail, # 18 Exhibit 18− 7/31/12 e−mail, # 19 Exhibit 19− 8/3/12 e−mail, # 20 Exhibit 20− 8/23/12 e−mail, # 21 Exhibit 21− 8/24/12 letter)(Miller, Gerald) (Entered: 09/20/2012)
TEXT ONLY ORDER granting parties' 76 Joint Motion for Extension of Time for the EEOC to File Supplemented Motion to Compel. The parties are directed to continue to engage in discussions to attempt to resolve those issues in controversy set forth in the EEOC's motion to compel. Counsel are to report on their efforts to resolve the issues on or before 11/7/2012. NO WRITTEN ORDER TO FOLLOW. Signed by Magistrate Judge Linda R. Anderson on 9/24/2012. (ACF) (Entered: 09/24/2012)
80 REPLY to Response to Motion re 64 MOTION for Summary Judgment filed by Venture, Inc. (Higginbotham, Robert) (Entered: 09/24/2012)
TEXT ONLY ORDER finding as moot Plaintiff's 60 Motion to Expedite. NO WRITTEN ORDER TO FOLLOW. Signed by Magistrate Judge Linda R. Anderson on 10/1/2012. (ACF) (Entered: 10/01/2012)
81 RESPONSE in Opposition re 72 Emergency MOTION for Discovery and Enlargement of Time to Respond to Defendant's Motion for Summary Judgment filed by Venture, Inc. (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit 1 − 9/19/12 letter from Venture to the EEOC regarding the EEOCs discovery shortcomings, # 2 Exhibit 2 − Notice of

Case: 3:11-cv-596 As of: 01/29/2014 11:32 PM CST 10 of 15

10/01/2012 10/03/2012 10/04/2012 10/05/2012
10/12/2012 10/12/2012 10/18/2012 10/18/2012
10/23/2012 10/30/2012 10/31/2012 10/31/2012
11/05/2012 11/06/2012
11/13/2012 11/14/2012

Charge of Discrimination, # 3 Exhibit 3 − Pre−Determination Letter, # 4 Exhibit 4 − Final Determination Letter, # 5 Exhibit 5 − Letter from EEOC dated July 7, 2011, # 6 Exhibit 6 − Revised Conciliation Agreement, # 7 Exhibit 7 − Post−Lawsuit Solicitation Letters, # 8 Exhibit 8 − Affidavit of Robert T. Higginbotham, Jr.)(Higginbotham, Robert) (Entered: 10/01/2012)
82 REPLY to Response to Motion re 67 MOTION to Stay Proceedings MOTION for Protective Order filed by Venture, Inc. (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit 6 − Revised Conciliation Agreement)(Higginbotham, Robert) (Entered: 10/01/2012)
83 NOTICE of Service of First Supplemental Response to Interrogatories by Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (Miller, Gerald) (Entered: 10/03/2012)
84 MOTION to Compel by Venture, Inc. (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit 1 − Good−Faith Letter with Good−Faith Certificate, # 2 Exhibit 2 − 9/27/12 email seeking discovery)(Higginbotham, Robert) (Entered: 10/04/2012)
85 REPLY to Response to Motion re 72 Emergency MOTION for Discovery and Enlargement of Time to Respond to Defendant's Motion for Summary Judgment, 73 Memorandum in Support of Motion, 81 Response in Opposition to Motion,, filed by Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (Miller, Gerald) (Entered: 10/05/2012)
86 NOTICE of Service of Designation of Experts by Francesa Sanders (Sanders, Edward) (Entered: 10/12/2012)
87 NOTICE of Service of Designation of Experts by Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (Miller, Gerald) (Entered: 10/12/2012)
88 RESPONSE in Opposition re 84 MOTION to Compel filed by Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (Miller, Gerald) (Entered: 10/18/2012)
89 RESPONSE in Opposition re 84 MOTION to Compel filed by Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit 1− EEOC's Interrogatory Responses, # 2 Exhibit 2− Letter from Venture 10−19−12, # 3 Exhibit 3− EEOC's Privilege Log, # 4 Exhibit 4− Letter from EEOC concerning discovery responses, # 5 Exhibit 5− Letter from EEOC seeking written consent, # 6 Exhibit 6−EEOC's First Supplemental Interr)(Miller, Gerald) (Entered: 10/18/2012)
90 ORDER granting 67 Motion to Stay Proceedings; granting in part and denying in part 72 Motion for Discovery. Signed by District Judge William H. Barbour, Jr on 10/23/12 (Lewis, Nijah) (Entered: 10/23/2012)
91 NOTICE to Take Deposition of Venture, Inc. (Rule 30(b)(6)) by Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (Miller, Gerald) (Entered: 10/30/2012)
92 Supplemental MOTION to Compel Discovery by Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (Miller, Gerald) (Entered: 10/31/2012)
93 REPLY to Response to Motion re 84 MOTION to Compel filed by Venture, Inc. (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit 3 − Post−lawsuit Claimant Solicitation Letters, # 2 Exhibit 4 − First Proposed Conciliation Agreement, # 3 Exhibit 5 − Ventures letter dated June 14, 2011, # 4 Exhibit 6 − Letter from EEOC dated July 7, 2011, # 5 Exhibit 7 − Revised Conciliation Agreement, # 6 Exhibit 8 − Currently Identified Eligible Claimants)(Higginbotham, Robert) (Entered: 10/31/2012)
94 Joint MOTION to Extend Rule 30(b)(6) Deposition Deadline by Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (Miller, Gerald) (Entered: 11/05/2012)
TEXT ONLY ORDER granting 94 Motion to Extend Deadline. The deadline for Plaintiff to take the Rule 30(b)(6) deposition is extended to December 7, 2012.NO FURTHER WRITTEN ORDER SHALL ISSUE. Signed by District Judge William H. Barbour, Jr on 11/6/12 (Lewis, Nijah) (Entered: 11/06/2012)
95 NOTICE to Take Deposition of Venture,Inc. by Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (Miller, Gerald) (Entered: 11/13/2012)
TEXT ONLY ORDER staying ruling on EEOC's Supplemental Motion to Compel 84 pending ruling by Judge Barbour on dispositive motion. Denying as moot

Case: 3:11-cv-596 As of: 01/29/2014 11:32 PM CST 11 of 15

11/15/2012 11/26/2012 12/13/2012 12/14/2012 12/14/2012 01/18/2013 01/18/2013 01/18/2013 01/24/2013 02/01/2013 02/04/2013
02/04/2013 02/05/2013

Motion to Compel 51 and denying Motion for Sanctions 56 . Counsel shall notify Magistrate Judge's chambers within 10 days following a ruling by Judge Barbour; a hearing on supplemental motion to compel shall be scheduled, if appropriate. NO WRITTEN ORDER TO FOLLOW. Signed by Magistrate Judge Linda R. Anderson on 11/14/2012. (ACF) (Entered: 11/14/2012)
TEXT ONLY ORDER staying 92 Motion to Compel until Judge Barbour rules on dispositive motion. 84 is also stayed. Motions 51 &56 were denied by Text Only Order on 11/14/2012. NO WRITTEN ORDER TO FOLLOW. Signed by Magistrate Judge Linda R. Anderson on 11/15/2012. (ACF) (Entered: 11/15/2012)
96 NOTICE of Appearance by Maneesh Varma on behalf of Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (Varma, Maneesh) (Entered: 11/26/2012)
97 NOTICE Pursuant to Court's Order by Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (Miller, Gerald) (Entered: 12/13/2012)
98 NOTICE of Service of Designation of Experts by Venture, Inc. (Higginbotham, Robert) (Entered: 12/14/2012)
99 ORDER. Plaintiff shall have up to and including January 21, 2013, in which to file its Response to the Motion for Summary Judgment. Defendant shall have up to and including February 4, 2013, in which to file its Rebuttal. Signed by District Judge William H. Barbour, Jr on 12/14/12 (Lewis, Nijah) (Entered: 12/14/2012)
100 RESPONSE in Opposition re 64 MOTION for Summary Judgment filed by Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit Ex.1− Declaration of Larry Turner, # 2 Exhibit Ex.2− Excerpts from Venture 30(b)(6) deposition)(Miller, Gerald) (Entered: 01/18/2013)
101 MEMORANDUM in Opposition re 64 MOTION for Summary Judgment filed by Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (Miller, Gerald) (Entered: 01/18/2013)
102 RESPONSE to Motion re 64 MOTION for Summary Judgment Objections to Defendant's Exhibits filed by Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (Miller, Gerald) (Entered: 01/18/2013)
103 First MOTION to Intervene by Frandreca Sanders (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit A−Affidavit, # 2 Exhibit B−Proposed Complaint)(Crowley, Michael) (Entered: 01/24/2013)
104 ADMINISTRATIVE ORDER REASSIGNING CASE. Case reassigned to Magistrate Judge Robert H. Walker for all further proceedings. Magistrate Judge Linda R. Anderson no longer assigned to case Signed by Chief District Judge Louis Guirola, Jr on 2/1/2013 (cwl) (Entered: 02/01/2013)
105 REPLY to Response to Motion re 64 MOTION for Summary Judgment filed by Venture, Inc. (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit 3 − EEOCs requests for information to Venture, # 2 Exhibit 4 − June 6, 2011 Pre−Determination Letter, # 3 Exhibit 5 − June 10, 2011 Determination Letter, # 4 Exhibit 6 − July 7, 2011 Letter re: efforts to conciliate this charge failed, # 5 Exhibit 8 − Post−lawsuit Claimant Solicitation Letters, # 6 Exhibit 8a − Currently Identified Eligible Claimants, # 7 Exhibit 9 − Affidavit of Robert T. Higginbotham, Jr., # 8 Exhibit 12 − Ventures June 14, 2011 How can you do that? letter, # 9 Exhibit 13 − Venture 30(b)(6) deposition, # 10 Exhibit 14 − August 4, 2011 Letter and Revised Conciliation Agreement, # 11 Exhibit 15 − Affidavit of G. Michael Massey, # 12 Exhibit 16 − EEOCs Requests for Admissions, # 13 Exhibit 17 − EEOCs Interrogatories, # 14 Exhibit 18 − EEOCs Requests for Production, # 15 Exhibit 19 − EEOCs Privilege Log, # 16 Exhibit 20 − Press Release)(Higginbotham, Robert) (Entered: 02/04/2013)
106 REPLY to Response to Motion re 64 MOTION for Summary Judgment re Response in Opposition to EEOC's Objection to Defendant's Exhibit filed by Venture, Inc. (Higginbotham, Robert) (Entered: 02/04/2013)
NOTICE of Hearing: Telephonic Status Conference set for 2/20/2013 02:30 PM before Magistrate Judge Robert H. Walker. Plaintiff will place the telephone call to Judge Walker's chambers with all necessary counsel on the line. (SR) (Entered:

Case: 3:11-cv-596 As of: 01/29/2014 11:32 PM CST 12 of 15

02/08/2013 02/11/2013 02/12/2013 02/12/2013 02/14/2013 02/20/2013 02/20/2013
03/01/2013 03/14/2013 03/14/2013 03/21/2013
03/22/2013 03/28/2013

02/05/2013)
Set/Reset Hearings: Telephonic Status Conference RESET for 2/20/2013 09:15 AM before Magistrate Judge Robert H. Walker due to an attorney conflict. Plaintiff will place the telephone call to Judge Walker's chambers with all necessary counsel on the line. (SR) (Entered: 02/08/2013)
107 RESPONSE in Opposition re 103 First MOTION to Intervene filed by Venture, Inc. (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit 1 − EEOC's Response to Interrogatory No. 5, # 2 Exhibit 2 − Currently Identified Eligible Claimants)(Higginbotham, Robert) (Entered: 02/11/2013)
108 MOTION to Strike 105 Reply to Response to Motion,,,, by Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (Miller, Gerald) (Entered: 02/12/2013)
109 MEMORANDUM in Support re 108 MOTION to Strike 105 Reply to Response to Motion,,,, filed by Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (Miller, Gerald) (Entered: 02/12/2013)
110 REPLY to Response to Motion re 103 First MOTION to Intervene , 107 Response in Opposition to Motion, filed by Frandreca Sanders (Crowley, Michael) (Entered: 02/14/2013)
Minute Entry for proceedings held before Magistrate Judge Robert H. Walker: Telephone Conference held on 2/20/2013 with attorneys Julie Bean, Gerald Miller, Edward Sanders, Michael Todd Crowley, and Timothy Threadgill. The Court set a settlement conference for March 21, 2013 at 1:30 PM. (SR) (Entered: 02/20/2013)
NOTICE of Hearing: Settlement Conference set for 3/21/2013 01:30 PM in Suite 6.550, Courtroom 6B (Jackson) Visiting before Magistrate Judge Robert H. Walker. Counsel are instructed to submit to Judge Walker, on or before one week prior to the conference, a memorandum (3 page maximum in PDF format) setting forth a brief explanation of the case, and a candid appraisal of the respective positions, including possible settlement figures. This document is NOT to be exchanged and will be viewed only by the Court. The settlement memoranda should be sent to Judge Walker via e−mail. PARTIES AND/OR COMPANY REPRESENTATIVES ARE TO BE PRESENT AT THE CONFERENCE. (SR) (Entered: 02/20/2013)
111 RESPONSE in Opposition re 108 MOTION to Strike 105 Reply to Response to Motion filed by Venture, Inc. (Higginbotham, Robert) (Entered: 03/01/2013)
112 MOTION for Summary Judgment For Failure To Name Party In Charge by Venture, Inc. (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit 1 − Notice of Charge, # 2 Exhibit 2 − Charge, # 3 Exhibit 3 − Paycheck, # 4 Exhibit 4 − Affidavit of Dan Myers, # 5 Exhibit 5 − Notice of 30(b)(6) Deposition, # 6 Exhibit 6 − Subpoena attached to Notice of 30(b)(6) Deposition)(Higginbotham, Robert) (Entered: 03/14/2013)
113 MEMORANDUM in Support re 112 MOTION for Summary Judgment For Failure To Name Party In Charge filed by Venture, Inc. (Higginbotham, Robert) (Entered: 03/14/2013)
Minute Entry for proceedings held before Magistrate Judge Robert H. Walker: Settlement Conference held on 3/21/2013. Present were attorneys Julie Bean, Gerald Miller, Michael Rowley, Timothy Threadgill, Robert Higginbotham, Jr. and Dan Myers (corporate representative of Venture, Inc.). After lengthy negotiations, the case did not settle. Pursuant to the Court's order 90 of October 23, 2012 staying the case pending determination of the Motion for Summary Judgment 64 , the Court will terminate all deadlines, including the trial which was previously scheduled for October 1, 2013. (SR) (Entered: 03/22/2013)
NOTICE: All case management order deadlines terminated pursuant to order 90 granting stay. (SR) (Entered: 03/22/2013)
114 RESPONSE in Opposition re 112 MOTION for Summary Judgment For Failure To Name Party In Charge filed by Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit Ex 1− Declaration of Larry Turner, # 2 Exhibit Ex. 2− Excerpts from Rule 30(b)(6) deposition of Venture)(Miller, Gerald) (Entered:

Case: 3:11-cv-596 As of: 01/29/2014 11:32 PM CST 13 of 15

03/28/2013 04/04/2013 04/05/2013
04/12/2013
04/16/2013 04/16/2013 05/03/2013 08/15/2013
08/20/2013 08/28/2013 09/11/2013 09/12/2013 09/16/2013 09/17/2013 09/24/2013

03/28/2013)
115 MEMORANDUM in Opposition re 112 MOTION for Summary Judgment For Failure To Name Party In Charge filed by Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (Miller, Gerald) (Entered: 03/28/2013)
116 Unopposed MOTION for Extension of Time to File Response/Reply as to 112 MOTION for Summary Judgment For Failure To Name Party In Charge by Venture, Inc. (Higginbotham, Robert) (Entered: 04/04/2013)
TEXT ONLY ORDER granting 116 Motion for Extension of Time to File Response/Reply as to 112 MOTION for Summary Judgment For Failure To Name Party In Charge. Replies due by 4/12/2013. NO FURTHER WRITTEN ORDER SHALL ISSUE. Signed by District Judge William H. Barbour, Jr on 4/5/13 (Lewis, Nijah) (Entered: 04/05/2013)
117 REPLY to Response to Motion re 112 MOTION for Summary Judgment For Failure To Name Party In Charge filed by Venture, Inc. (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit 1 − [Affidavit of Daniel Kenneth Myers, # 2 Exhibit 2 − [Charge of Discrimination, # 3 Exhibit 3 − Notice of Charge of Discrimination, # 4 Exhibit 4 − Letter from the EEOC dated June 6, 2011, # 5 Exhibit 5 − Determination Letter from the EEOC dated June 10, 2011, # 6 Exhibit 6 − Ventures letter dated June 14, 2011, # 7 Exhibit 7 −Currently Identified Eligible Claimants)(Higginbotham, Robert) (Entered: 04/12/2013)
118 MOTION to Strike 117 Reply to Response to Motion,, for Summary Judgment for Failure to Name Party in Charge by Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (Miller, Gerald) (Entered: 04/16/2013)
119 MEMORANDUM in Support re 118 MOTION to Strike 117 Reply to Response to Motion,, for Summary Judgment for Failure to Name Party in Charge filed by Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (Miller, Gerald) (Entered: 04/16/2013)
120 RESPONSE in Opposition re 118 MOTION to Strike 117 Reply to Response to Motion,, for Summary Judgment for Failure to Name Party in Charge filed by Venture, Inc. (Higginbotham, Robert) (Entered: 05/03/2013)
TEXT ONLY ORDER. All proceedings in this case are hereby stayed pending the mediation set for August 15, 2013. The Parties are ordered to notify this Court, in writing, within five (5) days, the outcome of the August 15, 2013 mediation. NO FURTHER WRITTEN ORDER SHALL ISSUE Signed by District Judge William H. Barbour, Jr on 8/15/13 (Lewis, Nijah) (Entered: 08/15/2013)
121 NOTICE OF STATUS OF MEDIATION PROCEEDING by Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (Murray, Steven) (Entered: 08/20/2013)
122 MOTION to Intervene as Plaintiff by Jasmine Crozier (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit − Affidavit of Jasmine Crozier, # 2 Exhibit − Proposed Complaint in Intervention, # 3 Exhibit − Amended Complaint of EEOC)(Bellinder, Thomas) (Entered: 08/28/2013)
123 RESPONSE in Opposition re 122 MOTION to Intervene as Plaintiff filed by Francesca Sanders, Frandreca Sanders (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit Exhibit A−Docket Sheet)(Crowley, Michael) (Entered: 09/11/2013)
124 REPLY to Response to Motion re 123 Response in Opposition to,re 122 MOTION to Intervene filed by Jasmine Crozier (Bellinder, Thomas) (Entered: 09/12/2013)
125 RESPONSE in Opposition re 122 MOTION to Intervene as Plaintiff filed by Venture, Inc. (Higginbotham, Robert) (Entered: 09/16/2013)
126 Rebuttal re 125 Response in Opposition to 122 MOTION to Intervene filed by Jasmine Crozier (Bellinder, Thomas) Modified on 9/18/2013 to reflect linkage to motion (cwl). (Entered: 09/17/2013)
127 ORDER denying 122 Motion of Jasmine Crozier for Leave to Intervene. Signed by District Judge William H. Barbour, Jr on 9/24/13 (Lewis, Nijah) (Entered: 09/24/2013)

Case: 3:11-cv-596 As of: 01/29/2014 11:32 PM CST 14 of 15

09/24/2013 09/25/2013 10/01/2013
10/01/2013 10/15/2013
10/15/2013 10/30/2013
10/30/2013 11/12/2013
11/22/2013 11/22/2013

128 ORDER dismissing as moot 64 Motion for Summary Judgment; dismissing as moot 84 Motion to Compel; dismissing as moot 92 Motion to Compel; granting 103 Motion of Frandreca Sanders to Intervene; dismissing as moot 108 Motion to Strike; dismissing as moot 112 Motion for Summary Judgment; dismissing as moot 118 Motion to Strike. Signed by District Judge William H. Barbour, Jr on 9/24/13 (Lewis, Nijah) (Entered: 09/24/2013)
NOTICE of Hearing: Telephone Conference set for 10/1/2013 09:30 AM before Magistrate Judge Robert H. Walker to obtain the status of the proposed consent decree. Plaintiff will place the telephone call to Judge Walker's chambers with all necessary counsel on the line.(SR) (Entered: 09/25/2013)
Minute Entry for proceedings held before Magistrate Judge Robert H. Walker: Telephone Conference held on 10/1/2013 with attorneys C. Emanuel Smith, Michael Todd Crowley, Timothy M. Threadgill and Bobby Higginbotham who advised that the case did settle at mediation as to the monetary amount involved in the settlement. However, the attorneys continue to discuss various terms of the proposed consent decree and are optimistic that these issues will be resolved. The Court will schedule another telephonic status call for October 15, 2013 at 10:00 AM. (SR) (Entered: 10/01/2013)
NOTICE of Hearing: Telephone Conference set for 10/15/2013 10:00 AM before Magistrate Judge Robert H. Walker. Plaintiff will place the telephone call to Judge Walker's chambers with all necessary counsel on the line. (SR) (Entered: 10/01/2013)
Minute Entry for proceedings held before Magistrate Judge Robert H. Walker: Telephone Conference held on 10/15/2013 with attorneys C. Emanuel Smith, Michael Todd Crowley, Timothy M. Threadgill and Robert H. Higginbotham, Jr. who advised that due to the government shutdown, negotiations have been slower than expected, but are proceeding. The attorneys continue to discuss the terms of the consent decree and are still optimistic that these issues will be resolved. The Court will schedule another telephonic status call for October 30, 2013 at 2:00 PM. (SR) (Entered: 10/15/2013)
NOTICE of Hearing: Telephonic Status Conference set for 10/30/2013 02:00 PM before Magistrate Judge Robert H. Walker. Plaintiff will place the telephone call to Judge Walker's chambers with all necessary counsel on the line. (SR) (Entered: 10/15/2013)
Minute Entry for proceedings held before Magistrate Judge Robert H. Walker: Telephonic Status Conference held on 10/30/2013 with attorneys C. Emanuel Smith, Michael Todd Crowley and Timothy M. Threadgill who advised that most of the issues have been resolved and fully expect the remaining three issues to be resolved soon. Once resolved, they will circulate a proposed consent decree for signature by the parties and will forward same to Judge Barbour no later than November 12, 2013. The Court will notice another telephonic status call for November 12, 2013 at 9:00 AM. (SR) (Entered: 10/30/2013)
NOTICE of Hearing: Telephonic Status Conference set for 11/12/2013 09:00 AM before Magistrate Judge Robert H. Walker. Plaintiff will place the telephone call to Judge Walker's chambers with all necessary counsel on the line. (SR) (Entered: 10/30/2013)
Minute Entry for proceedings held before Magistrate Judge Robert H. Walker: Telephonic Status Conference held on 11/12/2013 with attorneys C. Emanuel Smith, Michael Todd Crowley and Timothy M. Threadgill who advised they have resolved all of the terms of the consent decree and are circulating same for signatures. The attorneys agreed to submit the proposed consent decree to Judge Barbour for his consideration no later than November 18, 2013. (SR) (Entered: 11/12/2013)
129 CONSENT DECREE. Signed by District Judge William H. Barbour, Jr on 11/22/13 (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit A)(Lewis, Nijah) (Entered: 11/22/2013)
130 ORDER DISMISSING CASE with prejudice. Signed by District Judge William H. Barbour, Jr on 11/22/13 (MGB) (Entered: 11/22/2013)

Case: 3:11-cv-596 As of: 01/29/2014 11:32 PM CST 15 of 15

12/30/2013

131 NOTICE of Objection to Consent Decree by Jasmine Crozier (Bellinder, Thomas) (Entered: 12/30/2013)