Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-3_06-cv-06144/USCOURTS-cand-3_06-cv-06144-3/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 442
Nature of Suit: Civil Rights Employment
Cause of Action: 28:451 Employment Discrimination

---

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

SECOND REQUEST FOR RELIEF FROM ORDER OF DISMISSAL; CERTIFYING DECLARATION OF CINDY

O’HARA IN SUPPORT THEREOF; ORDER Page 1

WILLIAM R. TAMAYO (CA Bar No. 084965)

JONATHAN T. PECK (VA Bar No. 12303)

CINDY O’HARA (CA Bar No. 114555) 

EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY COMMISSION

San Francisco District Office

350 The Embarcadero, Suite 500

San Francisco, CA 94105

Telephone No. (415) 625-5653

Facsimile No. (415) 625-5657

Attorneys for Plaintiff

Equal Employment Opportunity Commission

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY 

COMMISSION, 

Plaintiff,

v.

COPART, INC.,

Defendant.

_______________________________________

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

Civil Action No. C-06-06144 SI

SECOND REQUEST FOR RELIEF

FROM ORDER OF DISMISSAL;

CERTIFYING DECLARATION OF

CINDY O’HARA IN SUPPORT

THEREOF;

[proposed] ORDER

 SECOND REQUEST FOR RELIEF FROM ORDER OF DISMISSAL

On June 25, 2007, this Court issued an order extending the time for the parties to

request relief from this Court’s March 29, 2007 order of dismissal to July 27, 2007. The

granting of that order was based on Plaintiff Equal Employment Opportunity

Commission’s (EEOC) June 22, 2007 Request for Relief from Order of Dismissal, and the

accompanying certifying declaration of EEOC attorney Cindy O’Hara, which stated that

the parties had reached an agreement through mediation, where a handwritten

agreement was signed expressing the principal terms of the settlement, but needed

additional time to finalize their Consent Decree and related settlement documents. The

EEOC now hereby requests that the extension granted by the Court to July 27, 2007 be

extended an additional month, as the parties have not yet been able to finalize their

Case 3:06-cv-06144-SI Document 21 Filed 07/31/07 Page 1 of 5
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

SECOND REQUEST FOR RELIEF FROM ORDER OF DISMISSAL; CERTIFYING DECLARATION OF CINDY

O’HARA IN SUPPORT THEREOF; ORDER Page 2

settlement documents, but anticipate that they will be able to do so with the requested

one month extension to August 27, 2007. In the alternative, the EEOC requests that the

case be returned to the Court’s active calendar. This Second Request, which is

supported by the accompanying certifying declaration of Cindy O’Hara, is made

because the settlement which the parties agreed to in their March 16, 2007 settlement

mediation which gave rise to the Court’s Order of Dismissal, is not yet final, and the

consideration for that settlement, a Consent Decree which provides for monetary

damages and injunctive relief, has not been executed by the parties or submitted to the

Court for approval, and the parties need additional time to finalize their settlement.

Dated: July 26, 2007 /S/ Cindy O’Hara 

Attorney for Plaintiff EEOC

CERTIFYING DECLARATION OF CINDY O’HARA IN SUPPORT OF SECOND

REQUEST FOR RELIEF FROM ORDER OF DISMISSAL

I, Cindy O’Hara, declare:

1. I am an attorney at law, licensed to practice in the State of California, a

senior trial attorney with Plaintiff EEOC, and an attorney of record for Plaintiff EEOC in

the above-captioned case. 

2. As stated in my prior declaration in support of Plaintiff EEOC’s Request

for Relief from Order of Dismissal, on March 16, 2007, the parties to this case (Plaintiff

EEOC and Defendant Copart, Inc.) participated in mediation under the Northern

District of California’s Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR) program, with Mediator

Marjorie Gelb, and reached agreement that this case would be settled through a

Consent Decree, and agreed, in writing on the major terms of that Consent Decree

including monetary relief, injunctive relief, and the term of the decree. 

3. On March 29, 2007, this Court entered an Order of Dismissal Upon

Settlement, which provided:

However, that if any party hereto certifies to this court, with proof of

service of a copy thereon on opposing counsel, within ninety days from

the date hereof, that settlement has not in fact occurred, the foregoing

order shall be vacated and this cause shall forthwith be restored to the

calendar for further proceedings.

Case 3:06-cv-06144-SI Document 21 Filed 07/31/07 Page 2 of 5
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

SECOND REQUEST FOR RELIEF FROM ORDER OF DISMISSAL; CERTIFYING DECLARATION OF CINDY

O’HARA IN SUPPORT THEREOF; ORDER Page 3

(NDCA Docket No. 17)

 Said ninety days would have ended on June 27, 2007, however, in response to Plaintiff

EEOC’s prior request, the Court extended it one month to July 27, 2007 to allow the

parties to finalize the settlement documents.

4. During the one month extension, from June 27, 2007 to July 27, 2007, the

parties have communicated and exchanged drafts of language for the Consent Decree

and related settlement documents. Unfortunately, the parties have been unable to reach

final agreement on the language of those documents, and receive approval from the

necessary party representatives, before the running of the July 27, 2007 extension. This

difficulty was due in significant part to the fact that my father passed away on July 16,

2007 and I was therefore unexpectedly absent from work to travel to Philadelphia to be

with my family and attend the funeral.

5. I spoke with Brian McMillan, counsel for Copart, today July 26, 2007, and

agreed that we will be unable to finalize and lodge our Consent Decree prior to the

running of the extension on July 27, 2007. We both agreed that an additional one month

extension should be requested, and agreed that such an extension should provide us

with the time necessary to finalize our Consent Decree and related documents, and

lodge the Decree with the Court.

6. Plaintiff EEOC therefore hereby requests that the Court either extend for

one month (to August 27, 2007) the deadline for the parties to submit certification to the

Court that settlement has not occurred; in the alternative, that the Court vacate the

Order of Dismissal Upon Settlement and restore this matter to the Court’s calendar.

7. As counsel for Plaintiff EEOC, pursuant to the provisions of the Order of

Dismissal Upon Settlement, I hereby certify to the Court, with proof of service of a copy

on opposing counsel, that settlement has not in fact occurred. 

I declare under penalty of perjury that the foregoing is true and correct. 

Executed this twenty-sixth day of July, 2007, at San Francisco, California.

 /S/ Cindy O’Hara 

Case 3:06-cv-06144-SI Document 21 Filed 07/31/07 Page 3 of 5
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

SECOND REQUEST FOR RELIEF FROM ORDER OF DISMISSAL; CERTIFYING DECLARATION OF CINDY

O’HARA IN SUPPORT THEREOF; ORDER Page 4

ORDER

Plaintiff having certified that settlement has not in fact occurred:

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that either party shall have until August 27, 2007 to

certify to the Court, with proof of service on opposing counsel, that settlement has not

in fact occurred. Upon proper certification, the Order of Dismissal filed March 29, 2007

shall be vacated and the cause shall forthwith be restored to the Court’s calendar. 

[or in the alternative]

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the Order of Dismissal issued by this Court on

March 29, 2007 is hereby vacated and the action is restored to the Court’s calendar.

Dated:__________________ ______________________________

United States District Court Judge

7/30/07

Case 3:06-cv-06144-SI Document 21 Filed 07/31/07 Page 4 of 5
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

SECOND REQUEST FOR RELIEF FROM ORDER OF DISMISSAL; CERTIFYING DECLARATION OF CINDY

O’HARA IN SUPPORT THEREOF; ORDER Page 5

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

I am a citizen of the United States, employed in the County of San Francisco, and

over the age of 18 years. My business address is the office of the Equal Employment

Opportunity Commission, San Francisco District Office, 350 The Embarcadero, Suite

500, San Francisco, California 94105.

On the date below, I electronically filed (which should result in electronic

service) and placed in the U.S. mail:

SECOND REQUEST FOR RELIEF FROM ORDER OF DISMISSAL; CERTIFYING

DECLARATION OF CINDY O’HARA IN SUPPORT THEREOF;

[proposed] ORDER

addressed to:

Brian T. McMillan

Todd K. Boyer

LITTLER MENDELSON

50 West San Fernando Street, 14th Floor

San Jose, CA 95113-2303

I certify under penalty of perjury that the above is true and correct.

DATED: July 26, 2007 /S/ Cindy O’Hara 

Case 3:06-cv-06144-SI Document 21 Filed 07/31/07 Page 5 of 5