Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-alnd-2_00-cv-02762/USCOURTS-alnd-2_00-cv-02762-1/pdf.json

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

---

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ALABAMA

SOUTHERN DIVISION

EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY

COMMISSION,

Plaintiff,

v.

PEMCO AEROPLEX, INC.,

Defendant.

}

}

}

}

}

}

}

}

}

}

CIVIL ACTION NO.

00-AR-2762-S

MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER

Plaintiff, Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (“EEOC”),

claiming the deliberative process privilege, has objected to the

production of certain of its internal documents requested by

defendant, Pemco Aeroplex, Inc. (“Pemco”), whereupon Pemco filed a

motion to compel. Pursuant to the order entered by this court on

December 2, 2005, EEOC filed the declaration of Cari M. Dominguez,

formally claiming the privilege that EEOC says attaches to the

materials sought by Pemco, and submitted to the court for in camera

inspection its materials that EEOC says should be protected.

The court has read every word of the materials submitted by

EEOC and finds that the privilege or privileges asserted by EEOC

are meaningful and valid only if EEOC concedes that it will not

offer into evidence any finding or determination it has made that

a racially hostile environment existed or exists at Pemco. Not

only would such a determination by the EEOC be self-serving and

unduly prejudicial, but for EEOC to offer it would constitute a

FILED

 2005 Dec-21 PM 03:26

U.S. DISTRICT COURT

N.D. OF ALABAMA

Case 2:00-cv-02762-WMA Document 79 Filed 12/21/05 Page 1 of 2
waiver of any claimed privilege by creating a reason for Pemco to

challenge the quality of the EEOC investigation that led it to the

conclusion it reached. The fact that the court in Burnes v. Pemco

received into evidence EEOC determinations favorable to plaintiffs

will not affect any prospective evidentiary ruling in this case in

which EEOC is itself the plaintiff.

If EEOC files the suggested concession by 4:30 p.m., December

30, 2005, Pemco’s motion to compel will be denied. If not, an

appropriately redacted set of EEOC’s materials will be made

available to Pemco by the partial grant of Pemco’s motion. 

DONE this 21 day of December, 2005. st

_____________________________

WILLIAM M. ACKER, JR.

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Case 2:00-cv-02762-WMA Document 79 Filed 12/21/05 Page 2 of 2