Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-3_03-cv-05499/USCOURTS-cand-3_03-cv-05499-6/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 442
Nature of Suit: Civil Rights Employment
Cause of Action: 42:2000e Job Discrimination (Employment)

---

U

nite

d

States District C

o

u

rt

For the Northern District of California

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

U

nite

d

States District C

o

u

rt

For the Northern District of California

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

ROSEANNE SAKAMOTO,

Plaintiff,

 v.

STEPHEN JOHNSON, Administrator, U.S.

Environmental Protection Agency,

Defendant.

 /

No. C 03-5499 SI

ORDER DENYING PLAINTIFF’S

MOTION TO AMEND SUMMARY

JUDGMENT ORDER

Plaintiff has filed a motion to amend the Court’s October 23, 2006 Order Denying Defendant’s

Motion for Summary Judgment on Equal Pay Act Claim. Plaintiff contends that the order incorrectly

states that plaintiff bears the burden of proof at trial to establish her Equal Pay Act Claim. However,

as the order clearly states, plaintiff bears the burden of proof to establish a prima facie case. See Order

at 5:2-10. If plaintiff is able to establish a prima facie case, the burden will shift to defendant to show

that the disparity in pay is due to a factor other than sex. See Stanley v. University of Southern

California, 178 F.3d 1069, 1075 (9th Cir. 1999). Because the Court’s order contains no error in its

statement of the law, the Court DENIES plaintiff’s motion. (Docket No. 381).

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: November 2, 2006

 

SUSAN ILLSTON

United States District Judge

Case 3:03-cv-05499-SI Document 386 Filed 11/02/06 Page 1 of 1