Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-3_03-cv-04403/USCOURTS-cand-3_03-cv-04403-5/pdf.json

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

---

United States District Court

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

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

CRYSTAL A. LEWIS, et al.,

Plaintiffs,

 v.

BAYER CORPORATION, INC., 

Defendant. /

No. C 03-04403 JSW

NOTICE OF TENTATIVE

RULING AND QUESTIONS

TO ALL PARTIES AND THEIR ATTORNEYS OF RECORD, PLEASE TAKE

NOTICE OF THE FOLLOWING TENTATIVE RULING AND QUESTIONS FOR THE

HEARING SCHEDULED ON OCTOBER 28, 2005:

The Court has reviewed the parties’ papers and, thus, does not wish to hear the parties

reargue matters addressed in those pleadings. If the parties intend to rely on authorities not

cited in their briefs, they are ORDERED to notify the Court and opposing counsel of these

authorities reasonably in advance of the hearing and to make copies available at the hearing. If

the parties submit such additional authorities, they are ORDERED to submit the citations to the

authorities only, without argument or additional briefing. See N.D. Civil Local Rule 7-3(d). 

The parties will be given the opportunity at oral argument to explain their reliance on such

authority.

The Court tentatively GRANTS Defendant’s motion for summary judgment.

Case 3:03-cv-04403-JSW Document 95 Filed 10/26/05 Page 1 of 2
United States District Court

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

2

The parties each shall have ten minutes to address the following questions:

1. Plaintiff does not factually contest the multiple instances in which she was

disciplined while working at Bayer. Instead, Plaintiff contends that she was

disciplined more severely when compared with other employees, who were

neither black nor female. What specific facts in the record before this Court can

Plaintiff provide which demonstrate that other, similarly situated employees

were treated more leniently for similar conduct?

2. What is the nexus, if any, between the alleged remark made by Dr. Gustavo

Mahler to Nathaniel Woods, Jr. and the alleged acts of discrimination against

Ms. Lewis?

3. Do the parties have anything further they wish to address?

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: October 26, 2005 

JEFFREY S. WHITE

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Case 3:03-cv-04403-JSW Document 95 Filed 10/26/05 Page 2 of 2