Page 1 of 5 

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN 

SOUTHERN DIVISION

EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY 

COMMISSION, 

Plaintiff, Case No. 2:08-CV-14713-GCS 

 Hon. George Caram Steeh 

 Magistrate Judge Donald A. Scheer 

v. 

NOBLE METAL PROCESSING INC., 

Defendant. 

___________________________________/ 

LAURIE A. YOUNG THERESA S. LLOYD (P29963) 

DEBORAH M. BARNO (P44525) PLUNKETT & COONEY 

NEDRA D. CAMPBELL (P58768) 38505 Woodward Ave. Ste 2000 

EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY Bloomfield Hills, Michigan 48304 

COMMISSION Counsel for Defendant 

Counsel for Plaintiff (248) 901-4005/4040 (fax) 

477 Michigan Ave., Room 865 Tlloyd@plunkettcooney.com 

Detroit, Michigan 48226 

(313) 226-3410/6584 (fax) 

Nedra.Campbell@eeoc.gov 

___________________________________/ 

CONSENT DECREE

 This action was commenced by the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission 

(“Commission” or “EEOC”) against Noble Metal Processing, Inc. (“Defendant”) under Title VII 

of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and Title I of the Civil Rights Act of 1991. The Commission's 

action was brought to correct unlawful employment practices on the basis of race and retaliation. 

More specifically, in its complaint, the Commission alleged that Defendant subjected Robert 

2:08-cv-14713-GCS-DAS Doc # 22 Filed 05/25/10 Pg 1 of 5 Pg ID 159
Page 2 of 5 

Bailey, Leslie Carter, Roshawn Ellis, James Edwards, Ernest Greer, Sean Lyte, Shah Qureshi, 

and Leonza Pickett (hereinafter referred to as the "Charging Parties") to unlawful discrimination 

by denying them promotional opportunities on the basis of their race (African American and 

Asian/Pacific Islander). The Commission further alleged that Defendant retaliated against Lyte 

because he filed a Charge of Discrimination by subjecting him to disparate terms and conditions 

regarding an offer of promotion. Also, the Commission alleged that Defendant retaliated against 

Mark Louks (hereinafter included and referred to as the "Charging Parties"), a Caucasian 

employee, by terminating his employment for opposing race discrimination. 

 Since the filing of this Complaint, Defendant has filed for bankruptcy and closed the 

plant where these employees were formerly employed. Given these circumstances, the 

Commission and Defendant agree that this action should be settled by entry of this Consent 

Decree (“Decree”). It is the intent of the parties that this Decree be a final and binding 

settlement in full disposition of the claims alleged above. 

 It is therefore the finding of this Court, made on the pleadings and the record as a whole, 

that: (1) the Court has jurisdiction over the parties and the subject matter of this action; (2) the 

purpose and provisions of Title VII will be promoted and effectuated by the entry of this Decree; 

and (3) this Decree fully and finally resolves all matters in controversy or claims and issues 

arising out of the Complaint, including any charges of discrimination filed by the above 

individual Charging Parties, as provided in the paragraphs below. 

 Therefore, it is hereby ORDERED, ADJUDGED AND DECREED: 

2:08-cv-14713-GCS-DAS Doc # 22 Filed 05/25/10 Pg 2 of 5 Pg ID 160
Page 3 of 5 

MONETARY RELIEF

1. Defendant agrees to pay monetary relief in the sum total of $ 190,000.00 to the 

Charging Parties. This payment is being made pursuant to the stipulation and order entered 

in the United States Bankruptcy Court for the Eastern District of Michigan, Southern 

Division, Case No. 09-51720-MBM, on August 25, 2009. The total settlement fund shall be 

distributed to the Charging Parties on whose behalf the Commission sought relief. 

2. The Commission shall have ten (10) days from the date this Consent Decree is 

entered by the Court to report to the Court on the proposed distribution of settlement funds, 

procedures for the Charging Parties' notification and a fairness hearing. Within ten (10) days 

of the issuance of a Court Order approving or modifying the Commission's proposed 

distribution of settlement funds, the Commission will notify each Charging Party of the 

proposed distribution, the requirement of signing a release to receive an award from the 

settlement fund, the requirement of keeping the Commission informed of any address 

changes, and the procedures for objecting to the proposed distribution. If no objections are 

filed with the Court, the Court will issue an Order approving the distribution of the settlement 

fund to the Charging Parties ("Final Order on Distribution"). If objections are filed, the 

Court will hold a fairness hearing before issuing the Final Order on Distribution. 

3. Within thirty (30) days after the Court has issued the Final Order on Distribution, 

Defendant shall make payment directly to each of the Charging Parties via certified mail, 

return receipt requested, at addresses provided by the Commission. Within thirty (30) days 

after payment has been made, Defendant shall mail a copy of each check to Laurie Young, 

2:08-cv-14713-GCS-DAS Doc # 22 Filed 05/25/10 Pg 3 of 5 Pg ID 161
Page 4 of 5 

Regional Attorney, care of Nedra Campbell, Trial Attorney, EEOC, 477 Michigan Avenue, 

Room 865, Detroit, Michigan 48226. 

DURATION

4. Absent extension, this Decree shall expire by its own terms ninety (90) days after 

proof of payment has been received by the EEOC. 

DISPUTE RESOLUTION AND COMPLIANCE

5. This Court shall retain jurisdiction over this action for the duration of this Decree and 

shall have all equitable powers, including injunctive relief, to enforce this Decree. Upon motion 

of either party, the Court may schedule a hearing for the purpose of reviewing compliance with 

this Decree. The parties shall engage in a good faith effort to resolve any dispute as to 

compliance prior to seeking review by the Court, and shall be required to give each other ten (10) 

days notice before moving for such review. All parties may conduct discovery under the Federal 

Rules of Civil Procedure for purposes of determining compliance with this Decree or defending 

against a claim of non-compliance. Should the Court determine that Defendant has not 

complied, the Court may order appropriate relief including extension of the Decree for the time 

necessary to remedy non-compliance, and attorney’s fees and costs. 

MISCELLANEOUS

6. Each party will bear its own costs and attorney’s fees. 

7. If any provision of this Decree is found to be unenforceable by a court, only the 

specific provision in question shall be affected and the other enforceable provisions shall 

remain in full force and effect. 

2:08-cv-14713-GCS-DAS Doc # 22 Filed 05/25/10 Pg 4 of 5 Pg ID 162
Page 5 of 5 

8. This Decree constitutes the entire agreement and commitments of the parties. Any 

modifications to this Decree must be mutually agreed upon in writing and signed by the 

parties. 

EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY NOBLE METAL PROCESSING, INC. 

COMMISSION 

 

s/Nedra Campbell______________________ _s/ Theresa Lloyd____________________ 

NEDRA CAMPBELL (P58768) THERESA S. LLOYD (P29963) 

Trial Attorney PLUNKETT & COONEY 

DETROIT FIELD OFFICE Counsel for Defendant 

Patrick V. McNamara Federal Building 38505 Woodward Ave. Ste 2000 

477 Michigan Ave, Room 865 Bloomfield Hills, Michigan 48304 

Detroit, Michigan 48226 (248) 901-4005/4040 (fax) 

(313) 226-3410 

Dated: 05/24/2010 Dated: 05/24/2010 

IT IS SO ORDERED: 

 s/George Caram Steeh

Date: May 25, 2010 Hon. George Caram Steeh 

 United States District Judge 

2:08-cv-14713-GCS-DAS Doc # 22 Filed 05/25/10 Pg 5 of 5 Pg ID 163