Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-5_13-cv-04507/USCOURTS-cand-5_13-cv-04507-16/pdf.json

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

---

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

United States District Court

Northern District of California

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

SAN JOSE DIVISION

EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY 

COMMISSION,

Plaintiff,

v.

PETERS' BAKERY,

Defendant.

Case No. 13-cv-04507-BLF 

ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE RE: 

CONTEMPT; AND DENYING 

PLAINTIFF'S REQUEST FOR STAY

[Re: ECF 154]

To DEFENDANT PETERS’ BAKERY:

YOU ARE HEREBY ORDERED to appear on January 7, 2016, at 9:00 a.m., in the 

courtroom of the Honorable Beth Labson Freeman, located at 280 South 1st Street, San Jose, CA 

95113, to show cause, if any you have, why you should not be adjudged in contempt of court for 

disobeying the Order issued by this Court on July 22, 2015, which provided that “Defendant is 

ENJOINED from terminating Ms. [Marcela] Ramirez’s employment pending resolution of this 

lawsuit or until further order of the Court,” by instructing Ms. Ramirez’s supervisor to remove Ms. 

Ramirez from the work schedule and not schedule her for any employment shifts after December 

31, 2015.

Defendant shall file a written response to the Order to Show Cause on or before 12:00 p.m. 

on January 4, 2016. Plaintiff may file a reply on or before 12:00 p.m. on January 6, 2016.

If Defendant is found in contempt of the Court’s prior preliminary injunction order, 

Defendant may be sanctioned up to $1,000 per day in addition to any back pay lost by Ms. 

Ramirez.

Case 5:13-cv-04507-BLF Document 159 Filed 12/24/15 Page 1 of 2
2

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

United States District Court

Northern District of California

Plaintiff’s request for a stay is DENIED. The legal remedy of back pay is adequate to 

compensate Plaintiff for any lost hours.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: December 24, 2015

 ______________________________________

BETH LABSON FREEMAN

United States District Judge

Case 5:13-cv-04507-BLF Document 159 Filed 12/24/15 Page 2 of 2