Document ID: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-3_03-cv-05499/USCOURTS-cand-3_03-cv-05499-10/pdf.json

Parties Involved:
Stephen Johnson
Defendant
Roseanne Sakamoto
Plaintiff
United States Environmental Protection Agency
Defendant

Document Text:

United 

States District 

Court

For the Northern District of California

United 

States District 

Court

For the Northern District of California

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

ROSEANNE SAKAMOTO,

Plaintiff,

 v.

STEPHEN JOHNSON, and U.S.

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION

AGENCY,

Defendants. /

No. C 03-5499 SI

INSTRUCTIONS TO JURY

(3/2/07)

Case 3:03-cv-05499-SI Document 437 Filed 03/02/07 Page 1 of 13
United 

States District 

Court

For the Northern District of California

DUTIES OF JURY TO FIND FACTS AND FOLLOW LAW

Members of the jury, now that you have heard all the evidence and the

arguments of the attorneys, it is my duty to instruct you on the law which applies to

this case. A copy of these instructions will be available in the jury room for you to

consult if you find it necessary.

It is your duty to find the facts from all the evidence in the case. To those

facts you will apply the law as I give it to you. You must follow the law as I give it

to you whether you agree with it or not. You must not be influenced by any

personal likes or dislikes, opinions, prejudices, or sympathy. That means that you

must decide the case solely on the evidence before you. You will recall that you

took an oath promising to do so at the beginning of the case.

In following my instruction, you must follow all of them and not single out

some and ignore others; they are all equally important. You must not read into

these instructions or into anything the court may have said or done any suggestion

as to what verdict you should return – that is a matter entirely up to you.

Case 3:03-cv-05499-SI Document 437 Filed 03/02/07 Page 2 of 13
United 

States District 

Court

For the Northern District of California

WHAT IS EVIDENCE

The evidence from which you are to decide what the facts are consists of:

(1) the sworn testimony of any witness;

(2) the exhibits which have been received into evidence; and

(3) any facts to which the lawyers have agreed or stipulated.

WHAT IS NOT EVIDENCE

In reaching your verdict, you may consider only the testimony and exhibits

received into evidence. Certain things are not evidence, and you may not consider

them in deciding what the facts are. I will list them for you:

(1) Arguments and statements by lawyers are not evidence. The lawyers

are not witnesses. What they have said in their opening statements, closing

arguments, and at other times is intended to help you interpret the evidence, but it

is not evidence. If the facts as you remember them differ from the way the lawyers

have stated them, your memory of them controls.

(2) Questions and objections by lawyers are not evidence. Attorneys have

a duty to their clients to object when they believe a question is improper under the

rules of evidence. You should not be influenced by the objection or by the court’s

ruling on it.

(3) Testimony that has been excluded or stricken, or that you have been

instructed to disregard, is not evidence and must not be considered. In addition,

some testimony and exhibits have been received only for a limited purpose; where

I have given a limiting instruction, you must follow it.

(4) Anything you may have seen or heard when the court was not in

session is not evidence. You are to decide the case solely on the evidence received

at the trial.

Case 3:03-cv-05499-SI Document 437 Filed 03/02/07 Page 3 of 13
United 

States District 

Court

For the Northern District of California

DIRECT AND CIRCUMSTANTIAL EVIDENCE

Evidence may be direct or circumstantial. Direct evidence is direct proof of

a fact, such as a testimony by a witness about what the witness personally saw or

heard or did. Circumstantial evidence is proof of one or more facts from which

you could find another fact.

You should consider both kinds of evidence. The law makes no distinction

between the weight to be given to either direct or circumstantial evidence. It is for

you to decide how much weight to give to any evidence.

CREDIBILITY OF WITNESSES

In deciding the facts in this case, you may have to decide which testimony to

believe and which testimony not to believe. You may believe everything a witness

says, or part of it, or none of it.

In considering the testimony of any witness, you may take into account:

(1) the opportunity and ability of the witness to see or hear or know the

things testified to;

(2) the witness’ memory;

(3) the witness’ manner while testifying;

(4) the witness’ interest in the outcome of the case and any bias or

prejudice;

(5) whether other evidence contradicted the witness’ testimony;

(6) the reasonableness of the witness’ testimony in light of all the

evidence; and

(7) any other factors that bear on believability.

The weight of the evidence as to a fact does not necessarily depend on the

number of witnesses who testify about that fact.

BURDEN OF PROOF –

Case 3:03-cv-05499-SI Document 437 Filed 03/02/07 Page 4 of 13
United 

States District 

Court

For the Northern District of California

PREPONDERANCE OF THE EVIDENCE

When a party has the burden of proof on any claim or affirmative defense by

a preponderance of the evidence, it means you must be persuaded by the evidence

that the claim or affirmative defense is more probably true than not true.

You should base your decision on all of the evidence, regardless of which

party presented it.

Case 3:03-cv-05499-SI Document 437 Filed 03/02/07 Page 5 of 13
United 

States District 

Court

For the Northern District of California

SUMMARY OF CONTENTIONS

Plaintiff Roseanne Sakamoto contends that her employer, the United States

Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), violated the prohibitions against gender,

race and national origin discrimination and retaliation in employment found in

Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 (42 U.S.C. § 2000e). Defendant EPA

denies all of plaintiff’s contentions.

Plaintiff claims that defendant EPA violated these statutes by engaging in disparate

discriminatory treatment, and by retaliating against her. I will now explain the

rules which apply to your decision on each of these claims. 

Case 3:03-cv-05499-SI Document 437 Filed 03/02/07 Page 6 of 13
United 

States District 

Court

For the Northern District of California

DISPARATE DISCRIMINATORY TREATMENT—

Plaintiff Roseanne Sakamoto has brought a claim of employment discrimination

against defendant EPA. The plaintiff claims that her gender, race and/or national

origin was a motivating factor for EPA’s decision to take adverse employment

actions against her. The actions she challenges are: delay in her promotion to GS12 and GS-13 pay levels; negative performance reviews; conduct of a desk audit;

failure to grant credit hours requests; excessive scrutiny; and increased workload. 

From now on, these actions will be called the “challenged actions.” 

Defendant EPA denies that plaintiff’s gender, race or national origin was a

motivating factor for the defendant’s decision to take any of the challenged actions,

and further claims that each of the challenged actions was based upon lawful

reasons.

DISPARATE DISCRIMINATORY TREATMENT— ELEMENTS AND

BURDEN OF PROOF

As to the plaintiff’s claim that her gender, race and/or national origin, or any of

them, was a motivating factor for EPA’s decision to take the challenged actions, 

plaintiff Roseanne Sakamoto has the burden of proving all of the following

elements by a preponderance of the evidence:

1. That EPA took one or more of the challenged actions; and 

2. That the action(s) taken was an adverse action, as that will be defined for you in

the next instruction; and

3. That plaintiff’s gender, race and/or national origin, or any of them, was a

motivating factor in at least one of the challenged actions.

If you find that the plaintiff has proved all of these elements, your verdict should

be for the plaintiff on this claim. If, on the other hand, the plaintiff has failed to

prove any of these elements, your verdict should be for the defendant on this claim. 

DISPARATE DISCRIMINATORY TREATMENT— DEFINITION OF

“ADVERSE EMPLOYMENT ACTION”

An action is an adverse employment action if it materially affects the terms,

conditions, or privileges of employment. 

RETALIATION—ELEMENTS

Case 3:03-cv-05499-SI Document 437 Filed 03/02/07 Page 7 of 13
United 

States District 

Court

For the Northern District of California

Plaintiff Roseanne Sakamoto also claims that in taking the challenged actions,

defendant EPA was retaliating against her because she engaged in protected

activities. Defendant EPA denies this claim. To prevail on her claim for

retaliation, the plaintiff has the burden of proving each of the following elements

by a preponderance of the evidence:

1. That the plaintiff engaged in or was engaging in an activity protected under

federal law, such as complaining of gender, race or national origin discrimination

in employment; and

2. That EPA subjected the plaintiff to an adverse employment action, as that is

defined in the next instruction; and

3. That the protected activity was a substantial or motivating factor in causing the

adverse employment action.

If you find that each of the elements on which the plaintiff has the burden of proof

has been proved, your verdict should be for the plaintiff. If, on the other hand, the

plaintiff has failed to prove any one of these elements, your verdict should be for

the defendant. 

“ADVERSE EMPLOYMENT ACTION” IN RETALIATION CASES

An action is an adverse employment action if it is reasonably likely to deter a

employee from engaging in protected activity. 

Case 3:03-cv-05499-SI Document 437 Filed 03/02/07 Page 8 of 13
United 

States District 

Court

For the Northern District of California

DAMAGES—PROOF

It is the duty of the Court to instruct you about the measure of damages. By

instructing you on damages, the Court does not mean to suggest for which party

your verdict should be rendered.

If you find for the plaintiff on her claim for disparate treatment, or retaliation, or

both, you must determine the plaintiff's damages. The plaintiff has the burden of

proving damages by a preponderance of the evidence. Damages means the amount

of money which will reasonably and fairly compensate the plaintiff for any injury

you find was caused by the defendant. You should consider the following:

--The mental or emotional pain and suffering, inconvenience, mental anguish and

loss of enjoyment of life experienced by Roseanne Sakamoto. 

The plaintiff has the burden of proving damages by a preponderance of the

evidence, and it is for you to determine what damages, if any, have been proved.

In calculating damages, you may not consider lost earnings or future lost earnings,

sometimes called back pay or front pay. The award of back pay or front pay,

should you find the EPA liable, will be decided and calculated by the Court. 

Likewise, in calculating damages you must not take into account any consideration

of attorney’s fees or court costs; should you find the EPA liable, those matters will

be decided and calculated by the Court. 

Your award must be based upon evidence and not upon speculation, guesswork or

conjecture.

NOMINAL DAMAGES

The law which applies to this case authorizes an award of nominal damages. If you

find for the plaintiff but you find that the plaintiff has failed to prove damages as

defined in these instructions, you must award nominal damages. Nominal damages

may not exceed one dollar.

Case 3:03-cv-05499-SI Document 437 Filed 03/02/07 Page 9 of 13
United 

States District 

Court

For the Northern District of California

DUTY TO DELIBERATE

When you begin your deliberations, you should elect one member of the jury

as your presiding juror. That person will preside over the deliberations and speak

for you here in court.

You will then discuss the case with your fellow jurors to reach agreement if

you can do so. You verdict must be unanimous.

Each of you must decide the case for yourself, but you should do so only

after you have considered all of the evidence, discussed it fully with the other

jurors, and listened to the views of your fellow jurors.

Do not be afraid to change your opinion if the discussion persuades you that

you should. Do not come to a decision simply because other jurors think it is right.

It is important that you attempt to reach a unanimous verdict but, of course,

only if each of you can do so after having made your own conscientious decision. 

Do not change an honest belief about the weight and effect of the evidence simply

to reach a verdict.

Case 3:03-cv-05499-SI Document 437 Filed 03/02/07 Page 10 of 13
United 

States District 

Court

For the Northern District of California

USE OF NOTES

Some of you have taken notes during the trial. Whether or not you took

notes, you should rely on your own memory of what was said. Notes are only to

assist your memory. You should not be overly influenced by the notes.

Case 3:03-cv-05499-SI Document 437 Filed 03/02/07 Page 11 of 13
United 

States District 

Court

For the Northern District of California

COMMUNICATION WITH COURT

If it becomes necessary during your deliberations to communicate with me,

you may send a note through Tracy, signed by your presiding juror or by one or

more members of the jury. No member of the jury should ever attempt to

communicate with me except by a signed writing; and I will communicate with any

member of the jury on anything concerning the case only in writing, or here in open

court. If you send out a question, I will consult with the parties before answering it,

which may take some time. You may continue your deliberations while waiting for

the answer to any question. Remember that you are not to tell anyone – including

me – how the jury stands, numerically or otherwise, until after you have reached a

unanimous verdict or have been discharged. Do not disclose any vote count in any

note to the court.

Case 3:03-cv-05499-SI Document 437 Filed 03/02/07 Page 12 of 13
United 

States District 

Court

For the Northern District of California

RETURN OF VERDICT

A verdict form has been prepared for you. After you have reached

unanimous agreement on a verdict, your presiding juror will fill in the form that has

been given to you, sign and date it, and advise the court that you are ready to return

to the courtroom.

Case 3:03-cv-05499-SI Document 437 Filed 03/02/07 Page 13 of 13