Datasets:

Meziane

/

lite-data

like 0

Using the provided source, generate a concise summary: SECTION Case 2 Document 59 Filed Page 1 of 3 IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE UNITED STATES FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF ALABAMA, NORTHERN DIVISION HARRIET DELORES CLEVELAND, ) ) SECTION PlaintiffSECTION, ) ) v. ) ) CITY OF MONTGOMERY and ) THE HONORABLE MILTON J. ) WESTRY, ) ) SECTION DefendantSECTION s. ) CIVIL ACTION NO. 2 (WO) MARKIS ANTWUAN WATTS, ) ) SECTION PlaintiffSECTION, ) ) v. ) ) CITY OF MONTGOMERY, THE ) HONORABLE MILTON J. ) WESTRY, and THE HONORABLE ) LES HAYES III, ) ) SECTION DefendantSECTION s. ) CIVIL ACTION NO. 2 (WO) JUDGMENT In accordance with the opinion entered this date, it is ORDERED that Case 2 Document 59 Filed Page 2 of 3 (1) The parties’ joint motion for entry of agreed settlement order (doc. no. 56) is granted. (2) The court declares that, under the current status of the law, the constitutional principles set out in Bearden v. Georgia, 461 U.S. 660 regarding incarceration for non-payment, and Turner v. Rogers, --- U.S. ---, 131 S. Ct. 2507 regarding notice, apply in municipal-court proceedings and that, to the extent applicable in a particular case, the judges of the Montgomery Municipal Court are legally required to follow them. (3) The court declares that the “Judicial Procedures of the Municipal Court of the City of Montgomery for Indigent SECTION DefendantSECTION s and Nonpayment,” submitted as Exhibit A to the joint motion for entry of agreed settlement order (ex. A to doc. no. 56), facially comply with the constitutional principles set out in Bearden, regarding incarceration for non-payment, and Turner, regarding notice. 2 Case 2 Document 59 Filed Page 3 of 3 (4) The court declares that these “Judicial Procedures of the Municipal Court of the City of Montgomery for Indigent SECTION DefendantSECTION s and Nonpayment” facially comply with the requirements of the Fourteenth and Sixth Amendments to the U.S. Constitution, Article I, §§ 1, 6, and 22 of the Alabama Constitution, and Rule 26.11 of the Alabama Rules of Criminal Procedure. The clerk of the court is DIRECTED to enter this document on the civil docket as a final judgment pursuant to Rule 58 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. These cases are closed. DONE, this the 17th day of November, 2014. /s/ Myron H. Thompson___ UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE Case 2 Document 59-1 Filed Page 1 of 2 A copy of this checklist is available at the website for the USCA, 11th Circuit at Effective on December 1, 2013, the new fee to file an appeal will increase from to CIVIL APPEALS JURISDICTION CHECKLIST 1. Appealable Orders Courts of Appeals have jurisdiction conferred and strictly limited by statute (a) Appeals from final orders pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1291 Only final orders and judgments of district courts, or final orders of bankruptcy courts which have been appealed to and fully resolved by a district court under 28 U.S.C.§ 158, generally are appealable. A final decision is one that “ends the litigation on the merits and leaves nothing for the court to do but execute the judgment.” Pitney Bowes, Inc. v. Mestre, 701 F.2d 1 365, 1 368 ( 11th Ci r. 1 983). A magistrate judge’s report and recommendation is not final and appealable until judgment thereon is entered by a district court judge. 28 U.S.C. § (b) In cases involving multiple parties or multiple claims, a judgment as to fewer than all parties or all claims is not a final, appealable decision unless the district court has certified the judgment for immediate review under Fed.R.Civ.P. 54(b). Williams v. Bishop, 732 F.2d 885, 885- 86 (11th Cir. 1984). A judg ment which resolves all issues except matters, such as attorneys’ fees and costs, that are collateral to the merits, is immediately appealable. Budinich v. Becton Dickinson & Co., 486 201, 108 S.Ct. 1717, 100 L.Ed.2d 178 LaChance v. Duffy’s Draft House, Inc., 146 F.3d 832, 837 (11th Cir. 1998). (c) Appeals pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § Appeals are permitted from orders “granting, continuing, modifying, refusing or dissolving injunctions or refusing to dissolve or modify injunctions...” and from “ i nterlocutory decrees... determining the rights and liabilities of parties to admiralty cases in which appeals from final decrees are allowed.” Interlocutory appeals from orders denying temporary restraining orders are not permitted. (d) Appeals pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § and Fed.R.App.P. 5 The certification specified in 28 U.S.C. § must be obtained before a petition for permission to appeal is filed in the Court of Appeals. The district court’s denial of a motion for certification is not itself appealable. (e) Appeals pursuant to judicially created exceptions to the finality rule Limited exceptions are discussed in cases including, but not limited to Cohen v. Beneficial Indus. Loan Corp., 337 U.S. 541, 546, 1221, 93 L.Ed. 1528 Atlantic Fed. Sav. & Loan Ass’n v. Blythe Eastman Paine Webber, Inc., 890 F.2d 371, 376 (11th Cir. 1989); Gillespie v. United States Steel Corp., 379 U.S. 148, 157, 85 S.Ct. 308, 312, 13 199 Rev. 4/04 Case 2 Document 59-1 Filed Page 2 of 2 2. Time for Filing The timely filing of a notice of appeal is mandatory and jurisdictional. Rinaldo v. Corbett, 256 F.3d 1276, 1278 (11th Cir. 2001). In civil cases, Fed.R.App.P. 4(a) and (c) set the following time limits (a) Fed.R.App.P. A notice of appeal in compliance with the requirements set forth in Fed.R.App.P. 3 must be filed in the district court within 30 days after the entry of the order or judgment appealed from. However, if the United States or an officer or agency thereof is a party, the notice of appeal must be filed in the district court within 60 days after such entry. THE NOTICE MUST BE RECEIVED AND FILED IN THE DISTRICT COURT NO LATER THAN THE LAST DAY OF THE APPEAL PERIOD – no additional days are provided for mailing. Special filing provisions for inmates are discussed below. (b) Fed.R.App.P. “If one party timely files a notice of appeal, any other party may file a notice of appeal within 14 days after the date when the first notice was filed, or within the time otherwise prescribed by this Rule 4(a), whichever period ends later.” (c) Fed.R.App.P. If any party makes a timely motion in the district court under the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure of a type specified in this rule, the time for appeal for all parties runs from the date of entry of the order disposing of the last such timely filed motion. (d) Fed.R.App.P. and Under certain limited circumstances, the district court may extend the time to file a notice of appeal. Under Rule the time may be extended if a motion for an extension is filed within 30 days after expiration of the time otherwise provided to file a notice of appeal, upon a showing of excusable neglect or good cause. Under Rule the time may be extended if the district court finds upon motion that a party did not timely receive notice of the entry of the judgment or order, and that no party would be prejudiced by an extension. (e) Fed.R.App.P. 4(c) If an inmate confined to an institution files a notice of appeal in either a civil case or a criminal case, the notice of appeal is timely if it is deposited in the institution’s internal mail system on or before the last day for filing. Timely filing may be shown by a declaration in compliance with 28 U.S.C. § 1746 or a notarized statement, either of which must set forth the date of deposit and state that first-class postage has been prepaid. 3. Format of the notice of appeal Form 1, Appendix of Forms to the Federal Rules of Appellate Procedure, is a suitable format. See also Fed.R.App.P. 3(c). A pro se notice of appeal must be signed by the appellant. 4. Effect of a notice of appeal A district court loses jurisdiction (authority) to act after the filing of a timely notice of appeal, except for actions in aid of appellate jurisdiction or to rule on a timely motion of the type specified in Fed.R.App.P. Summary: In 2013, indigent detainee filed a complaint against the City of Montgomery and a Municipal Court Judge for unconstitutionally ordering the petitioner to serve time for her inability to pay court-order fines and fees for their traffic violations. The complaint was originally filed in the Circuit Court of Montgomery County, Alabama and then transferred to the U.S. District Court for the Middle District of Alabama, where it was consolidated with a similar case. In the amended complaint, petitioners alleged that the imprisonment orders violated their Sixth and Fourteenth Amendment Rights. Petitioners sought remedy through injunctive and declaratory relief. In 2014, the parties reached a settlement that provided new judicial procedures for the Municipal Court to follow regarding indigent defendants and nonpayment. It also included three declarations, most importantly, it declared that the constitutional principles set out in Bearden v. Georgia, 461 U.S. 660 and Turner v. Rogers, 131 S. Ct. 2507 (2011) applied to municipal court proceedings, and awarded plaintiff's attorney fees. The case closed in November 2014.

In 2013, indigent detainee filed a complaint against the City of Montgomery and a Municipal Court Judge for unconstitutionally ordering the petitioner to serve time for her inability to pay court-order fines and fees for their traffic violations. The complaint was originally filed in the Circuit Court of Montgomery County, Alabama and then transferred to the U.S. District Court for the Middle District of Alabama, where it was consolidated with a similar case. In the amended complaint, petitioners alleged that the imprisonment orders violated their Sixth and Fourteenth Amendment Rights. Petitioners sought remedy through injunctive and declaratory relief. In 2014, the parties reached a settlement that provided new judicial procedures for the Municipal Court to follow regarding indigent defendants and nonpayment. It also included three declarations, most importantly, it declared that the constitutional principles set out in Bearden v. Georgia, 461 U.S. 660 and Turner v. Rogers, 131 S. Ct. 2507 (2011) applied to municipal court proceedings, and awarded plaintiff's attorney fees. The case closed in November 2014.

Using the provided source, generate a concise summary: SECTION U.S. District Court Middle District of Louisiana (Baton Rouge) CIVIL DOCKET FOR CASE # 3 Create an Alert for This Case on RECAP Ryan et al v. Smith et al Assigned to Chief Judge Shelly D. Dick Referred to Magistrate Judge Scott D. Johnson Cause 42 1983 Civil Rights Act Date Filed Jury Demand None Nature of Suit 555 Prisoner Conditions Jurisdiction Federal Question SECTION PlaintiffSECTION Joshua Ryan on behalf of themselves and all others similarly situated represented by Eric Andrew Foley MacArthur Justice Center 4400 S. Carrollton Ave. New Orleans, LA 70119 (504) Email [email protected] LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED David J. Utter The Claiborne Firm, P.C. 410 East Bay Street Savannah, GA 31401 (912) Fax (912) Email [email protected] ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED Hannah Lommers-Johnson MacArthur Justice Center 4400 S. Carrollton Ave. New Orleans, LA 70119 Email [email protected] ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED Jacob G Longman Longman Jakuback, A Professional Law Corporation Louisiana SECTION PlaintiffSECTION 830 Main St. Baton Rouge, LA 70802 Fax Email [email protected] ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED Miriam R. Nemeth Advancement Project National Office 1220 L. Street NW Suite 850 Washington, DC 20005 Fax Email [email protected] ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED Scott C. Robichaux The Claiborne Firm, P.C. 410 East Bay Street Savannah, GA 31401 (912) Fax (912) PRO HAC VICE Tiffany Yang Advancement Project National Office 1220 L Street, N.W. Suite 850 Washington, DC 20005 Email [email protected] PRO HAC VICE ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED William R. Claiborne The Claiborne Firm, P.C. 410 East Bay Street Savannah, GA 31401 Fax Email [email protected] PRO HAC VICE ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED Blaze Franklin on behalf of themselves and all others similarly situated represented by Eric Andrew Foley (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED David J. Utter (See above for address) ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED Hannah Lommers-Johnson (See above for address) ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED Jacob G Longman (See above for address) ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED Miriam R. Nemeth (See above for address) ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED Scott C. Robichaux (See above for address) PRO HAC VICE Tiffany Yang (See above for address) PRO HAC VICE ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED William R. Claiborne (See above for address) PRO HAC VICE ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED SECTION PlaintiffSECTION Amisar Cyrus Nourani on behalf of themselves and all others similarly situated represented by Eric Andrew Foley (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED David J. Utter (See above for address) ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED Hannah Lommers-Johnson (See above for address) ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED Jacob G Longman (See above for address) ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED Miriam R. Nemeth (See above for address) ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED Scott C. Robichaux (See above for address) PRO HAC VICE Tiffany Yang (See above for address) PRO HAC VICE ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED William R. Claiborne (See above for address) PRO HAC VICE ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED SECTION PlaintiffSECTION Herbert Scully on behalf of themselves and all others similarly situated represented by Eric Andrew Foley (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED David J. Utter (See above for address) ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED Hannah Lommers-Johnson (See above for address) ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED Jacob G Longman (See above for address) ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED Miriam R. Nemeth (See above for address) ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED Scott C. Robichaux (See above for address) PRO HAC VICE Tiffany Yang (See above for address) PRO HAC VICE ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED William R. Claiborne (See above for address) PRO HAC VICE ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED V. SECTION DefendantSECTION Tarvald Anthony Smith in their official capacity as Judges of the 19th JDC of Louisiana SECTION DefendantSECTION Bonnie Jackson in their official capacity as Judges of the 19th JDC of Louisiana represented by Jacqueline B. Wilson Louisiana Department of Justice 1885 North Third Street Baton Rouge, LA 70802 Email [email protected] LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED James Garrison Evans Louisiana Department of Justice 1885 North Third Street P.O. Box 94005 Baton Rouge, LA 70802 Email [email protected] ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED represented by Jacqueline B. Wilson (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED James Garrison Evans (See above for address) ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED SECTION DefendantSECTION Ronald Johnson in their official capacity as Judges of the 19th JDC of Louisiana represented by Jacqueline B. Wilson (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED James Garrison Evans (See above for address) ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED SECTION DefendantSECTION Nicole Robinson in her official capacity as Commissioner of the 19th JDC of Louisiana represented by Jacqueline B. Wilson (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED James Garrison Evans (See above for address) ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED SECTION DefendantSECTION Frank Howze in his official capacity as Coordinator of the Bail Bond Program for the 19th JDC of Louisiana represented by Jacqueline B. Wilson (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED James Garrison Evans (See above for address) ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED SECTION DefendantSECTION Sid J. Gautreaux, III represented by Catherine S. St. Pierre Sheriff, in his official capacity Erlingson Banks as Sheriff of East Baton LA Rouge Parish 301 Mainstreet, Ste. 2110 Baton Rouge Baton Rouge, LA 70801 Fax Email [email protected] LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED Mary G. Erlingson Erlingson Banks, PLLC 301 Main Street Suite 2110 Baton Rouge, LA 70801 Fax Email [email protected] ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED SECTION DefendantSECTION Dennis Grimes Lt. Col., in his official capacity as Warden of East Baton Rouge Parish Prison represented by Catherine S. St. Pierre (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED Mary G. Erlingson (See above for address) ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED Date Filed # Docket Text 1 CLASS ACTION COMPLAINT against All SECTION DefendantSECTION s ( Filing fee $ 402 receipt number filed by Amisar Cyrus Nourani, Blaze Franklin, Joshua Ryan, Herbert Scully. (Attachments # 1 Civil Cover Sheet, # 2 Summons-Smith, # 3 Summons-Jackson, # 4 Summons-Johnson, # 5 Summons-Robinson, # 6 Summons-Howze, # 7 Summons-Gautreaux, # 8 Summons-Grimes)(Foley, Eric) Modified on to edit text. (EDC). (Attachments 2-8 replaced on (EDC). Modified on to flatten documents. (EDC). (Entered 2 MOTION for Class Certificaton by All SECTION PlaintiffSECTION s. (Attachments # 1 Memorandum in Support, # 2 Attachment Decl., # 3 Attachment Decl., # 4 Attachment Decl., # 5 Attachment Decl.)(Foley, Eric) Modified on to edit text. (EDC). (Entered 3 MOTION for Leave to Proceed Anonymously and File Documents Revealing Identity Under Seal by All SECTION PlaintiffSECTION s. (Attachments # 1 Memorandum in Support)(Foley, Eric). Modified on to edit text (LLH). (Entered 4 MOTION for William R. Claiborne to Appear Pro Hac Vice (Filing fee Receipt Number by All SECTION PlaintiffSECTION s. (Attachments # 1 Exhibit A- Sworn Statement, # 2 Exhibit B- Certificate of Good Standing, # 3 Proposed Pleading; Proposed Order)(Utter, David) (Entered 5 MOTION for Miriam R. Nemeth to Appear Pro Hac Vice (Filing fee Receipt Number by All SECTION PlaintiffSECTION s. (Attachments # 1 Exhibit A- Sworn Statement, # 2 Exhibit BCertificate of Good Standing, # 3 Proposed Pleading; Proposed Order)(Utter, David) (Entered 6 MOTION for Scott C. Robichaux to Appear Pro Hac Vice (Filing fee Receipt Number by All SECTION PlaintiffSECTION s. (Attachments # 1 Exhibit A- Sworn Statement, # 2 Exhibit BCertificate of Good Standing, # 3 Proposed Pleading; Proposed Order)(Utter, David) (Entered 7 MOTION for Tiffany Yang to Appear Pro Hac Vice (Filing fee Receipt Number by All SECTION PlaintiffSECTION s. (Attachments # 1 Exhibit A- Sworn Statement, # 2 Exhibit B- Certificate of Good Standing, # 3 Proposed Pleading; Proposed Order)(Utter, David) (Entered 8 Letter to Attorney Eric Andrew Foley regarding Thomas B. Harvey who is Co-Counsel for party Joshua Ryan, Blaze Franklin, Amisar Cyrus Nourani and Herbert Scully. Attorney is not admitted to practice in LAMD. (EDC) (Entered 9 Summons Issued as to Sid J. Gautreaux, III, Dennis Grimes, Frank Howze, Bonnie Jackson, Ronald Johnson, Nicole Robinson, Tarvald Anthony Smith. (NOTICE Counsel shall print and serve both the summons and all attachments in accordance with Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 4.) (Attachments # 1 summons, # 2 summons, # 3 summons, # 4 summons, # 5 summons, # 6 summons)(EDC) (Entered MOTION(S) REFERRED 5 MOTION for Miriam R. Nemeth to Appear Pro Hac Vice (Filing fee Receipt Number 7 MOTION for Tiffany Yang to Appear Pro Hac Vice (Filing fee Receipt Number 4 MOTION for William R. Claiborne to Appear Pro Hac Vice (Filing fee Receipt Number 6 MOTION for Scott C. Robichaux to Appear Pro Hac Vice (Filing fee Receipt Number This motion is now pending before the USMJ. (EDC) (Entered 10 Notice of Filing Exhibit B to 5 MOTION for Miriam R. Nemeth to Appear Pro Hac Vice (Filing fee Receipt Number filed by All SECTION PlaintiffSECTION s. (Utter, David) Modified on to edit text. (EDC). (Entered 11 AFFIDAVIT in Support of 5 MOTION for Miriam R. Nemeth to Appear Pro Hac Vice (Filing fee Receipt Number filed by All SECTION PlaintiffSECTION s. (Utter, David) (Entered 12 MOTION for Temporary Restraining Order and Preliminary Injunction Against SECTION DefendantSECTION s Gautreaux and Grimes by All SECTION PlaintiffSECTION s. (Attachments # 1 Exhibit Conventional Filing notice of Exhibits 1-3, # 2 Exhibit 4, # 3 Exhibit 5, # 4 Exhibit 6, # 5 Exhibit 7, # 6 Exhibit 8, # 7 Exhibit 9, # 8 Exhibit Eric). Added MOTION for Preliminary Injunction on (EDC). (Entered MOTION(S) REFERRED 3 MOTION for Leave to Proceed Anonymously MOTION for Leave to File Documents Revealing Identity Under Seal. This motion is now pending before the USMJ. (LLH) (Entered 13 MOTION for Leave to File Brief Exceeding Page Limit to Support 12 Motion for Temporary Restraining Order and Preliminary Injunction by All SECTION PlaintiffSECTION s. (Attachment for Temporary Restraining Order and Preliminary Injunction, # 2 Proposed Order)(Foley, Eric) Modified on to edit text. (EDC). (Entered 14 Ex Parte MOTION for Leave to Conventionally File Audio Exhibits 1-3 to SECTION PlaintiffSECTION s' Motion for Temporary Restraining Order and Preliminary Injunction 12 by All SECTION PlaintiffSECTION s. (Attachments # 1 Proposed Order)(Foley, Eric) (Entered 15 ORDER granting 14 MOTION for Leave to file exhibits conventionally. Signed by Chief Judge Shelly D. Dick on (This is a TEXT ENTRY ONLY. There is no hyperlink or PDF document associated with this entry.) (BKA) (Entered 16 ORDER granting 13 Motion for Leave to File Excess Pages. Signed by Chief Judge Shelly D. Dick on (This is a TEXT ENTRY ONLY. There is no hyperlink or PDF document associated with this entry.) (BKA) (Entered 17 Notice to Counsel SECTION PlaintiffSECTION s are hereby ORDERED to identify and notify counsel for each SECTION DefendantSECTION of the subject Motion Rec. Doc. 12 and provide the Court, by Notice filed in the record, with names and contact information (including email addresses) for each counsel identified. A Telephone Conference is hereby set for at 02 00 PM before Chief Judge Shelly D. Dick. Participant dial-in instructions will be provided via separate email from the Courtroom Deputy. Evidence, in electronic format, shall be provided in accordance with Local Rule 79 and Administrative Procedures. (This is a TEXT ENTRY ONLY. There is no hyperlink or PDF document associated with this entry.)(BKA) (Entered 24 MEMORANDUM in Support of 12 MOTION for Temporary Restraining Order and Preliminary Injunction Against SECTION DefendantSECTION s Gautreaux and Grimes filed by Blaze Franklin, Amisar Cyrus Nourani, Joshua Ryan, Herbert Scully. (EDC) (Entered 18 ORDER denying 4 and 5 Motions for William R. Claiborne and Miriam R. Nemeth to Appear Pro Hac Vice. Signed by Magistrate Judge Scott D. Johnson on (This is a TEXT ENTRY ONLY. There is no hyperlink or PDF document associated with this entry.) (KAH) (Entered 19 ORDER granting 6 and 7 Motions for Scott C. Robichaux and Tiffany Yang to Appear Pro Hac Vice. Signed by Magistrate Judge Scott D. Johnson on (This is a TEXT ENTRY ONLY. There is no hyperlink or PDF document associated with this entry.) (KAH) (Entered 20 MOTION for Miriam R. Nemeth to Appear Pro Hac Vice by All SECTION PlaintiffSECTION s. (Attachments # 1 Exhibit A- Sworn Statement, # 2 Exhibit BCertificate of Good Standing, # 3 Proposed Pleading; Proposed Order)(Utter, David) (Entered 21 MOTION for William R. Claiborne to Appear Pro Hac Vice by All SECTION PlaintiffSECTION s. (Attachments # 1 Exhibit A- Sworn Statement, # 2 Exhibit BCertificate of Good Standing, # 3 Proposed Pleading; Proposed Order)(Utter, David) (Entered MOTION(S) REFERRED 21 MOTION for William R. Claiborne to Appear Pro Hac Vice, 20 MOTION for Miriam R. Nemeth to Appear Pro Hac Vice. This motion is now pending before the USMJ. (EDC) (Entered 22 AFFIDAVIT in Support of 21 MOTION for William R. Claiborne to Appear Pro Hac Vice filed by All SECTION PlaintiffSECTION s. (Utter, David) (Entered 23 ORDER granting 20 and 21 Motions for Miriam R. Nemeth and William R. Claiborne to Appear Pro Hac Vice. Signed by Magistrate Judge Scott D. Johnson on (This is a TEXT ENTRY ONLY. There is no hyperlink or PDF document associated with this entry.) (KAH) (Entered 27 NOTICE of Conventional Filing in Clerk's Office of DVD-ROM of Exhibits 1,2 and 3 by Blaze Franklin, Amisar Cyrus Nourani, Joshua Ryan, Herbert Scully re 12 MOTION for Temporary Restraining Order and Preliminary Injunction Against SECTION DefendantSECTION s Gautreaux and Grimes. (EDC) (Entered 25 MOTION for Expedited Discovery by All SECTION PlaintiffSECTION s. (Attachments # 1 Memorandum in Support, # 2 Attachment Proposed Subpoena, # 3 Proposed Order)(Foley, Eric) Modified on to edit the docket text (KMW). (Entered MOTION(S) REFERRED 25 MOTION for Expedited Discovery. This motion is now pending before the USMJ. (KMW) (Entered 26 NOTICE of Compliance by Blaze Franklin, Amisar Cyrus Nourani, Joshua Ryan, Herbert Scully to 17 Notice to Counsel, (Foley, Eric) (Entered 28 Minute Entry for proceedings held before Chief Judge Shelly D. Dick Telephone Conference held on (BKA) (Entered 29 NOTICE of Briefing Schedule on 12 MOTION for Temporary Restraining Order Simultaneous briefs due is a TEXT ENTRY ONLY. There is no hyperlink or PDF document associated with this entry.) (BKA) (Entered 30 NOTICE of Briefing Schedule on 12 MOTION for Preliminary Injunction Simultaneous briefs are due Motion Hearing set for through at 09 30 AM in Courtroom 3 before Chief Judge Shelly D. Dick. (This is a TEXT ENTRY ONLY. There is no hyperlink or PDF document associated with this entry.)(BKA) (Entered 31 WAIVER OF SERVICE Returned Executed by Joshua Ryan. Sid J. Gautreaux, III waiver sent on answer due (Utter, David) (Entered 32 WAIVER OF SERVICE Returned Executed by Joshua Ryan. Dennis Grimes waiver sent on answer due (Utter, David) (Entered 33 MEMORANDUM in Opposition to 12 MOTION for Temporary Restraining Order and Preliminary Injunction Against SECTION DefendantSECTION s Gautreaux and Grimes MOTION for Preliminary Injunction filed by Sid J. Gautreaux, III, Dennis Grimes. (Attachments # 1 Exhibit, # 2 Exhibit, # 3 Exhibit, # 4 Exhibit)(St. Pierre, Catherine) (Entered 34 MEMORANDUM in Opposition to 12 MOTION for Temporary Restraining Order and Preliminary Injunction Against SECTION DefendantSECTION s Gautreaux and Grimes MOTION for Preliminary Injunction filed by Frank Howze, Bonnie Jackson, Ronald Johnson, Nicole Robinson, Tarvald Anthony Smith. (Wilson, Jacqueline) (Entered 35 Supplemental MEMORANDUM in Support of 12 MOTION for Temporary Restraining Order and Preliminary Injunction Against SECTION DefendantSECTION s Gautreaux and Grimes MOTION for Preliminary Injunction filed by All SECTION PlaintiffSECTION s. (Attachments # 1 Attachment Notice of Conventional Filing of Exhibits Eric) (Entered 36 Ex Parte MOTION for Leave to Conventionally File Audio Exhibits in Connection with SECTION PlaintiffSECTION s' Supplemental Brief by All SECTION PlaintiffSECTION s. (Attachments # 1 Proposed Pleading; Proposed Order)(Foley, Eric) (Entered 37 WAIVER OF SERVICE Returned Executed by Amisar Cyrus Nourani, Blaze Franklin, Joshua Ryan, Herbert Scully. Frank Howze waiver sent on answer due (Utter, David) (Entered 38 WAIVER OF SERVICE Returned Executed by Amisar Cyrus Nourani, Blaze Franklin, Joshua Ryan, Herbert Scully. Ronald Johnson waiver sent on answer due (Utter, David) (Entered 39 WAIVER OF SERVICE Returned Executed by Amisar Cyrus Nourani, Blaze Franklin, Joshua Ryan, Herbert Scully. Tarvald Anthony Smith waiver sent on answer due (Utter, David) (Entered 40 WAIVER OF SERVICE Returned Executed by Amisar Cyrus Nourani, Blaze Franklin, Joshua Ryan, Herbert Scully. Nicole Robinson waiver sent on answer due (Utter, David) (Entered 41 ORDER granting 36 MOTION for Leave to Conventionally File Audio Exhibits in Connection with SECTION PlaintiffSECTION s' Supplemental Brief. Signed by Chief Judge Shelly D. Dick on (SWE) Modified on to correct file date (SWE). (Entered 42 ORDER SECTION PlaintiffSECTION s shall submit a response to SECTION DefendantSECTION s' Oppositions to 12 Motion for Temporary Restraining Order and Preliminarily Injunction on or before Signed by Chief Judge Shelly D. Dick on (LLH) (Entered 43 Emergency Second MOTION for Expedited Discovery and Request for Status Conference by All SECTION PlaintiffSECTION s. (Attachments # 1 Memorandum in Support, # 2 Exhibit Correspondence, # 3 Exhibit to Judicial SECTION DefendantSECTION s, # 4 Exhibit 3-Duty Schedule, # 5 Proposed Order)(Foley, Eric) Modified on to edit text.(EDC). Added MOTION for Request for Status Conference on (EDC). Modified on to edit text. (EDC). (Entered MOTION(S) REFERRED 43 Emergency Second MOTION for Expedited Discovery and Request for Status Conference MOTION for Conference. This motion is now pending before the USMJ. (EDC) (Entered 44 WAIVER OF SERVICE Returned Executed by Amisar Cyrus Nourani, Blaze Franklin, Joshua Ryan, Herbert Scully. Bonnie Jackson waiver sent on answer due (Utter, David) (Entered 45 ORDER granting in part 43 Emergency Second Motion for Expedited Discovery and Request for Status Conference. A Telephone Status Conference is set for at 11 00 AM before Magistrate Judge Scott D. Johnson to discuss the expedited discovery requested in the motion. Counsel participating in the Conference shall call using the AT&T Teleconference System five minutes prior to the conference. Counsel will receive a separate e-mail containing dial in information prior to the conference. Signed by Magistrate Judge Scott D. Johnson on (This is a TEXT ENTRY ONLY. There is no hyperlink or PDF document associated with this entry.) (KAH) (Entered 46 NOTICE of Conventional Filing in Clerk's Office of Audio Exhibits by Blaze Franklin, Amisar Cyrus Nourani, Joshua Ryan, Herbert Scully re 35 Memorandum in Support of Motion for Temporary Restraining Order and Preliminary Injunction Against SECTION DefendantSECTION s Gautreaux and Grimes. (This is a TEXT ENTRY ONLY. There is no hyperlink or PDF document associated with this entry.) (EDC) (Entered 47 MEMORANDUM in Opposition to 43 Emergency Second MOTION for Expedited Discovery MOTION for Request for Status Conference filed by Frank Howze, Bonnie Jackson, Ronald Johnson, Nicole Robinson, Tarvald Anthony Smith. (Wilson, Jacqueline) (Entered 48 ORDER Based on the representations of the Parties at the January 14, 2020 status conference that the discovery requested by SECTION PlaintiffSECTION s in their 25 Motion for Expedited Discovery has been provided, SECTION PlaintiffSECTION s' Motion for Expedited Discovery (R. Doc. 25), therefore, is DENIED AS MOOT. Signed by Magistrate Judge Scott D. Johnson on (This is a TEXT ENTRY ONLY. There is no hyperlink or PDF document associated with this entry.) (KAH) (Entered 49 Minute Entry/Order for proceedings held before Magistrate Judge Scott D. Johnson. Telephone Status Conference held on The parties discussed the status of this matter, including SECTION PlaintiffSECTION s Motion for Expedited Discovery (R. Doc. 25) and Emergency Second Motion for Expedited Discovery (Rec Doc 43). The parties agreed upon the scope of expedited discovery and a deadline of January 20, 2021, for responding to the limited discovery. Discovery due by (ELW) Modified on to add a space (ELW). (Entered 50 ORDER granting in part 43 Motion for Expedited Discovery. By SECTION DefendantSECTION s are ordered to produce recordings from five agreed-upon days of call-out hearings before each of SECTION DefendantSECTION s Judge Bonnie Jackson, Judge Ronald Johnson, Judge Tarvald Anthony Smith, and Commissioner Nicole Robinson. SECTION DefendantSECTION s also are ordered to provide responses to SECTION PlaintiffSECTION s' Requests for Admission by Because simultaneous briefs regarding SECTION PlaintiffSECTION s' Motion for Preliminary Injunction are due the Parties are hereby granted leave to submit supplemental briefs, only if needed, pertaining only to this limited discovery. Any such supplemental briefs must be filed no later than at 12 00 p.m. and must not exceed 10 pages. Signed by Magistrate Judge Scott D. Johnson on (EDC) (Entered 51 MEMORANDUM in Opposition to 12 MOTION for Preliminary Injunction Against SECTION DefendantSECTION s Gautreaux and Grimes filed by Sid J. Gautreaux, III, Dennis Grimes. (Attachments # 1 Exhibit)(St. Pierre, Catherine) Modified on to edit text. (EDC). (Entered 52 MEMORANDUM in Opposition to 12 MOTION for Preliminary Injunction Against SECTION DefendantSECTION s Gautreaux and Grimes filed by Frank Howze, Bonnie Jackson, Ronald Johnson, Nicole Robinson, Tarvald Anthony Smith. (Wilson, Jacqueline) Modified on to edit text. (EDC). (Entered 53 Supplemental Brief in Support of 12 MOTION for Preliminary Injunction Against SECTION DefendantSECTION s Gautreaux and Grimes filed by All SECTION PlaintiffSECTION s. (Attachments # 1 Exhibit Eric) Modified on to edit text. (EDC). (Entered 54 Unopposed MOTION to Withdraw Request for Temporary Restraining Order by All SECTION PlaintiffSECTION s. (Attachments # 1 Proposed Pleading; Proposed Order)(Foley, Eric) (Entered 55 ORDER granting 54 Motion to Withdraw Request for Temporary Restraining Order. Signed by Chief Judge Shelly D. Dick on (This is a TEXT ENTRY ONLY. There is no hyperlink or PDF document associated with this entry.) (BKA) (Entered 56 Joint MOTION to Continue Hearing on SECTION PlaintiffSECTION s' Motion for Preliminary Injunction 12, 30 by All SECTION PlaintiffSECTION s. (Attachments # 1 Proposed Pleading; Proposed Order)(Foley, Eric) (Entered 57 ORDER granting 56 Motion to Continue Preliminary Injunction Hearing and related briefing deadlines. Parties shall file a Joint Status Report on or before Signed by Chief Judge Shelly D. Dick on (BKA) (Entered 58 SETTLEMENT CONFERENCE ORDER Settlement Conference set for at 01 30 PM by video before Magistrate Judge Scott D. Johnson. Signed by Magistrate Judge Scott D. Johnson on (Attachments # 1 Attachment)(KAH) (Entered 59 Ex Parte MOTION for Extension of Time to File Responsive Pleadings to SECTION PlaintiffSECTION s' Class Action Complaint by Sid J. Gautreaux, III, Dennis Grimes. (Attachments # 1 Proposed Pleading;)(St. Pierre, Catherine) Modified on to edit the docket text (SWE). (Entered MOTION(S) REFERRED 59 Ex Parte MOTION for Extension of Time to File Responsive Pleadings to SECTION PlaintiffSECTION s' Class Action Complaint. This motion is now pending before the USMJ. (SWE) (Entered 60 ORDER Because the requirements of Local Rule 7(a) are met, the 59 Ex Parte Motion for Extension of Time to File Responsive Pleadings filed by SECTION DefendantSECTION s Sheriff Sid J. Gautreaux, III, and Warden Dennis Grimes is GRANTED. Gautreaux and Grimes now have until March 22, 2021, to file responsive pleadings. Signed by Magistrate Judge Scott D. Johnson on (This is a TEXT ENTRY ONLY. There is no hyperlink or PDF document associated with this entry.) (KAH) (Entered PACER Service Center Transaction Receipt PACER Login Description Billable Pages Exempt flag 20 16 46 CRClearinghouse Client Code Docket Report Search Criteria 12 Cost Not Exempt Exempt reason Peach 3 1.20 Not Exempt Summary: In December 2020, four individuals at East Baton Rouge Parish Prison (EBRPP) filed this class action lawsuit alleging violations of their Fourteenth and Sixth Amendment rights by judicial and prison officials. On December 15, the plaintiffs filed a motion for temporary restraining order and preliminary injunction. The request for a temporary restraining order was later withdrawn in January 2021. A settlement conference is scheduled for March 11 and the deadline for the parties to file a joint status report is March 21. The defendants' responsive pleading to the complaint is due on March 22, 2021. This case is ongoing.

In December 2020, four individuals at East Baton Rouge Parish Prison (EBRPP) filed this class action lawsuit alleging violations of their Fourteenth and Sixth Amendment rights by judicial and prison officials. On December 15, the plaintiffs filed a motion for temporary restraining order and preliminary injunction. The request for a temporary restraining order was later withdrawn in January 2021. A settlement conference is scheduled for March 11 and the deadline for the parties to file a joint status report is March 21. The defendants' responsive pleading to the complaint is due on March 22, 2021. This case is ongoing.

Using the provided source, generate a concise summary: SECTION U.S. District Court Eastern District of Missouri (St. Louis) CIVIL DOCKET FOR CASE # 4 Thomas et al v. St. Ann, Missouri, City of et al Assigned to District Judge Sarah E. Pitlyk Related SECTION Case SECTION 4 Cause 28 1331 Federal Question Other Civil Rights In Re Maurice B Graham Date Filed Jury Demand Both Nature of Suit 440 Civil Rights Other Jurisdiction Federal Question SECTION PlaintiffSECTION Quinton M. Thomas represented by Blake Alexander Strode ARCHCITY DEFENDERS 440 N. 4th St. Suite 390 St. Louis, MO 63102 x1003 Fax Email [email protected] LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED Edward James Hall ARCHCITY DEFENDERS 440 N. 4th St. Suite 390 St. Louis, MO 63102 Fax Email TERMINATED LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED Maureen Hanlon ARCHCITY DEFENDERS 440 N. 4th St. Suite 390 St. Louis, MO 63102 Email [email protected] LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED Michael-John Voss ARCHCITY DEFENDERS 440 N. 4th St. Suite 390 St. Louis, MO 63102 x1002 Fax Email [email protected] LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED Nathaniel Richard Carroll KEANE LAW LLC 7777 Bonhomme Ave. Suite 1600 St. Louis, MO 63105 Email [email protected] TERMINATED LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED Samuel Zachary Fayne ARNOLD AND PORTER LLP - San Francisco Three Embarcadero Center Tenth Floor San Francisco, CA 94111 Fax Email [email protected] LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED Thomas B. Harvey ADVANCEMENT PROJECT 1220 L. Street NW Suite 850 Washington, DC 20005 Fax Email [email protected] LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED Albert Teng ARNOLD AND PORTER LLP - DC 601 Massachusetts Ave., N.W. Washington, DC 20001 Email [email protected] TERMINATED PRO HAC VICE David B. Bergman ARNOLD AND PORTER LLP - DC 601 Massachusetts Ave., N.W. Washington, DC 20001 Email [email protected] PRO HAC VICE ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED Jacqueline Marie Kutnik-Bauder ARCHCITY DEFENDERS 440 N. 4th St. Suite 390 St. Louis, MO 63102 x1024 Fax Email [email protected] ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED John Robinson ARNOLD AND PORTER LLP - DC 601 Massachusetts Ave., N.W. Washington, DC 20001 Email [email protected] ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED SECTION PlaintiffSECTION Roelif Earl Carter John McCann Waldron ARCHCITY DEFENDERS 440 N. 4th St. Suite 390 St. Louis, MO 63102 x1021 Fax Email [email protected] ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED Seth Jason Wiener ARNOLD AND PORTER LLP - DC 601 Massachusetts Ave., N.W. Washington, DC 20001 Fax Email [email protected] TERMINATED PRO HAC VICE ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED Sima Atri ARCHCITY DEFENDERS 440 N. 4th St. Suite 390 St. Louis, MO 63102 x2006 Fax Email [email protected] TERMINATED ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED represented by Blake Alexander Strode (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED Edward James Hall (See above for address) TERMINATED LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED Maureen Hanlon (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED Michael-John Voss (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED Nathaniel Richard Carroll (See above for address) TERMINATED LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED Samuel Zachary Fayne (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY SECTION PlaintiffSECTION Bradley Jiles ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED Thomas B. Harvey (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED Albert Teng (See above for address) TERMINATED PRO HAC VICE Jacqueline Marie Kutnik-Bauder (See above for address) ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED John Robinson (See above for address) ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED John McCann Waldron (See above for address) ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED Seth Jason Wiener (See above for address) TERMINATED PRO HAC VICE ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED Sima Atri (See above for address) TERMINATED ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED represented by Blake Alexander Strode (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED Edward James Hall (See above for address) TERMINATED LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED Ma Summary: On August 9, 2016, a group of individuals who were placed in jail because of an inability to pay fines, penalties, and other charges filed a class action lawsuit in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Missouri. The plaintiffs sued thirteen St. Louis County municipalities under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 and § 2201. The plaintiffs, represented by ArchCity Defenders and private counsel, asked the court for declaratory, injunctive, and compensatory relief, claiming violations of the Fourth, Sixth, and Fourteenth Amendments. In their complaint, the plaintiffs claimed that the defendant municipalities engaged in a deliberate and coordinated conspiracy to fill their coffers by extorting money from thousands of poor, disproportionately African-American people in the St. Louis region. On April 24, 2017, the case was dismissed as to all defendant municipalities except the City of St. Ann. The case (including mediation efforts) is ongoing against the City.

On August 9, 2016, a group of individuals who were placed in jail because of an inability to pay fines, penalties, and other charges filed a class action lawsuit in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Missouri. The plaintiffs sued thirteen St. Louis County municipalities under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 and § 2201. The plaintiffs, represented by ArchCity Defenders and private counsel, asked the court for declaratory, injunctive, and compensatory relief, claiming violations of the Fourth, Sixth, and Fourteenth Amendments. In their complaint, the plaintiffs claimed that the defendant municipalities engaged in a deliberate and coordinated conspiracy to fill their coffers by extorting money from thousands of poor, disproportionately African-American people in the St. Louis region. On April 24, 2017, the case was dismissed as to all defendant municipalities except the City of St. Ann. The case (including mediation efforts) is ongoing against the City.

Using the provided source, generate a concise summary: SECTION SECTION Case SECTION 3 As of 08 17 AM CST 1 of 5 U.S. District Court Northern District of Texas (Dallas) CIVIL DOCKET FOR CASE # 3 CLOSED,JURY Equal Employment Opportunity Commission v. Beall Concrete Enterprises Inc Assigned to Judge Reed C O'Connor Cause 28 451 Employment Discrimination SECTION PlaintiffSECTION Date Filed Date Terminated Jury Demand SECTION PlaintiffSECTION Nature of Suit 442 Civil Rights Employment Jurisdiction U.S. Government SECTION PlaintiffSECTION Equal Employment Opportunity Commission represented by Robert A Canino, Jr Equal Employment Opportunity Commission Dallas District Office 207 S Houston St 3rd Floor Dallas, TX 75202 Fax Email [email protected] LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED Bar Status Admitted/In Good Standing Devika Rani Seth Equal Employment Opportunity Commission Dallas District Office 207 S Houston 3rd Floor Dallas, TX 75202 Fax FAX Email [email protected] ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED Bar Status Admitted/In Good Standing Gwendolyn Young Reams Equal Employment Opportunity Commission 207 S Houston St 3rd Floor Dallas, TX 75202 Bar Status Not Admitted James L Lee Equal Employment Opportunity Commission 207 S Houston St 3rd Floor Dallas, TX 75202 Bar Status Not Admitted Ronald S Cooper Equal Employment Opportunity Commission 207 S Houston St 3rd Floor Dallas, TX 75202 SECTION Case SECTION 3 As of 08 17 AM CST 2 of 5 Bar Status Not Admitted Toby W Costas Equal Employment Opportunity Commission Dallas District Office 207 S Houston 3rd Floor Dallas, TX 75202 Fax FAX Email [email protected] ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED Bar Status Admitted/In Good Standing V. SECTION DefendantSECTION Beall Concrete Enterprises Inc a wholly owned susidiary of US Concrete Inc represented by Mark J Levine Levine &Associates 4747 Bellaire Suite 500 Bellaire, TX 77401 Fax Email [email protected] LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED Bar Status Admitted/In Good Standing Date Filed # Docket Text 1 COMPLAINT against Beall Concrete Enterprises Inc filed by Equal Employment Opportunity Commission. (axm, ) (Entered DEMAND for Trial by Jury by Equal Employment Opportunity Commission. (contained within complaint) (axm, ) (Entered 2 Summons Issued as to Beall Concrete Enterprises Inc. (axm, ) (Entered 3 CERTIFICATE OF INTERESTED PERSONS/DISCLOSURE STATEMENT by Equal Employment Opportunity Commission. (axm, ) (Entered ***Magistrate Judge Ramirez chosen by random selection to handle matters that may be referred in this case. (axm, ) (Entered 4 Order Designating Case for ECF - see order for specifics. (Signed by Judge Barbara M. G. Lynn on (axm, ) (Entered 5 NOTICE of Waiver of Service by Beall Concrete Enterprises Inc (jyg, ) (Entered 6 WAIVER OF SERVICE Returned Executed as to Beall Concrete Enterprises Inc. Waiver sent on answer due (jyg, ) (Entered 7 ANSWER to Complaint by Beall Concrete Enterprises Inc (Levine, Mark) (Entered 8 Order Requring Scheduling Conference and Report for Content for Scheduling Order Proposal due by See order for details. (Signed by Judge Barbara M. G. Lynn on January 16, 2007) (Attachments # 1 consent letter# 2 Consent Form) (jyg) (Entered SECTION Case SECTION 3 As of 08 17 AM CST 3 of 5 9 STATUS REPORT JOINT by Equal Employment Opportunity Commission. (Costas, Toby) (Entered 10 SCHEDULING ORDER Amended Pleadings due by Discovery due by Pretrial Conference set for 10 00 AM before Judge Barbara M. G. Lynn. Joinder of Parties due by This case is set for jury trial on this Court's three-week docket beginning at 09 00 AM before Judge Barbara M. G. Lynn. Motions due by Proposed Pretrial Order due by Pretrial Materials due by Settlement Report due by See order for other deadlines. (Signed by Judge Barbara M. G. Lynn on April 16, 2007) (jyg) Modified on (Gardner, Jo). (Entered 11 ORDER Confirming Trial Date The Court's April 16, 2007 Scheduling Order is hereby AMENDED to reflect that this case is currently set for a jury trial on this Court's three-week docket call beginning April 7, 2008, at 9 00 a.m., not April 8, 2008. All other deadlines set out in the Court's Scheduling Order remain in effect. (Signed by Judge Barbara M. G. Lynn on April 17, 2007) (jyg) (Entered 12 AMENDED COMPLAINT against Beall Concrete Enterprises Inc filed by Equal Employment Opportunity Commission. (Attachments # 1 Appendix Beal Second Amend Redlined) (Costas, Toby) (Entered 13 Designation of Experts by Equal Employment Opportunity Commission. (Costas, Toby) (Entered 14 NOTICE of Attorney Appearance by Devika Seth on behalf of Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (Seth, Devika) (Entered 15 Unopposed MOTION for Leave to File First Amended Answer by Beall Concrete Enterprises Inc (Attachments # 1 Exhibit A) (Levine, Mark) Modified on (npk) (Entered 16 UNOPPOSED MOTION for Leave to File Amended Answer by Beall Concrete Enterprises Inc (Attachments # 1 Exhibit A) (Levine, Mark) Modified on (npk) (Entered 17 ORDER granting 15, 16 Unopposed Motions for Leave to File First Amended Answer to Complaint. Amended Answer due (Signed by Judge Barbara M. G. Lynn on (npk) (Entered 18 AMENDED ANSWER by Beall Concrete Enterprises Inc re 12 Amended Complaint (Levine, Mark) (Entered 19 Unopposed Motion to Extend Dispositive Motion Deadline by Beall Concrete Enterprises Inc. (Levine, Mark) Modified on (klm). (Entered 20 ORDER granting 19 Unopposed Motion for Extension of Time to File Dispositive Motion Deadline. Motion for Summary Judgment due by Responses due by (Signed by Judge Barbara M. G. Lynn on October 23, 2007) (jyg) (Entered 21 STATUS REPORT JOINT SETTLEMENT STATUS REPORT by Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, Beall Concrete Enterprises Inc. (Seth, Devika) (Entered 22 MOTION for Partial Summary Judgment on SECTION PlaintiffSECTION's Claims Under the Americans with Disabilities Act by Beall Concrete Enterprises Inc with Brief/Memorandum in Support. (Attachments # 1 Supplement Brief in Support) (Levine, Mark) Modified on (lmp). (Entered 23 NOTICE of Change of Address by Mark J Levine, counsel for Beall Concrete Enterprises Inc. New address is 4747 Bellaire, Suite 500, Bellaire, Texas 77401, Telephone (713) Facsimile (713) (Levine, Mark) (Entered SECTION Case SECTION 3 As of 08 17 AM CST 4 of 5 24 RESPONSE/Brief in Opposition filed by Equal Employment Opportunity Commission re 22 for Partial Summary Judgment. (Seth, Devika) Modified on (lmp). (Entered 25 Appendix in Support filed by Equal Employment Opportunity Commission 24 RESPONSE/Brief in Opposition filed by Equal Employment Opportunity Commission re 22 for Partial Summary Judgment.(Attachments # 1 Appendix Declaration of Charles Gentry# 2 Appendix Affidavit of Charles Gentry# 3 Appendix TWC Report Charles Gentry# 4 Affidavit TWC Report Charles Gentry# 5 Appendix Defendat's Employee Handbook Hourly Employees# 6 Appendix SECTION DefendantSECTION's Employee Handbook Hourly Employees# 7 Appendix SECTION DefendantSECTION's Supplemental Statement Position &Employee Status Form# 8 Appendix SECTION DefendantSECTION's Objections and Answers to SECTION PlaintiffSECTION First Set Interrogatories# 9 Appendix Excerpts Depo Charles Gentry# 10 Appendix Excerpts Depo 11 Appendix DepoExcerpts Patti Reardon 12 Appendix Depo Excerpts Patti Reardon 13 Appendix Excerpts Depo Patti Reardon &Affidavit of Devika Seth) (Seth, Devika) Modified on (lmp). (Entered 28 SPECIAL ORDER NO. 3-270. Case reassigned to Judge Reed C O'Connor for all further proceedings. Judge Barbara M. G. Lynn no longer assigned to case. (see order for specifics) (Signed by Judge Sidney A Fitzwater on (lmp) (Entered 26 Amended Brief/Memorandum in Support filed by Beall Concrete Enterprises Inc re 22 MOTION for Partial Summary Judgment on SECTION PlaintiffSECTION's Claims Under the Americans with Disabilities Act. (Levine, Mark) Modified on (lmp). (Entered 27 Appendix in Support filed by Beall Concrete Enterprises Inc re 26 Amended Brief/Memorandum in Support 22 MOTION for Partial Summary Judgment on SECTION PlaintiffSECTION's Claims Under the Americans with Disabilities Act. (Levine, Mark) Modified on (lmp). (Entered 29 TRIAL SCHEDULING ORDER Pretrial Order due by Jury Trial set for 09 30 AM before Judge Reed C O'Connor. See order for other specifics. (Signed by Judge Reed C O'Connor on (jrb) (Entered 30 Memorandum Opinion and Order granting 22 Motion for Summary Judgment, filed by Beall Concrete Enterprises Inc. (See Order for specifics) (Signed by Judge Reed C O'Connor on (skt) (Entered 31 Witness List by Equal Employment Opportunity Commission. (Seth, Devika) (Entered 32 Exhibit List by Equal Employment Opportunity Commission. (Seth, Devika) (Entered 33 Designation of Deposition by Equal Employment Opportunity Commission. (Seth, Devika) (Entered 34 ORDER SETTING PRETRIAL STATUS HEARING Status Hearing set for 10 30 AM before Judge Reed C O'Connor. (see order for specifics) (Signed by Judge Reed C O'Connor on (axm) (Entered 35 Exhibit List by Beall Concrete Enterprises Inc. (Levine, Mark) (Entered 36 Witness List by Beall Concrete Enterprises Inc. (Levine, Mark) (Entered 37 Exhibit List Amended by Equal Employment Opportunity Commission. (Seth, Devika) (Entered 38 Agreed Proposed Jury Instructions by Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, Beall Concrete Enterprises Inc. (Seth, Devika) Modified on (tln). (Entered SECTION Case SECTION 3 As of 08 17 AM CST 5 of 5 39 Proposed Voir Dire by Equal Employment Opportunity Commission. (Seth, Devika) (Entered 40 Proposed Voir Dire by Beall Concrete Enterprises Inc. (Levine, Mark) (Entered 41 SECTION DefendantSECTION's Rule Disclosure Objections by Beall Concrete Enterprises Inc. (Levine, Mark) Modified on (tln). (Entered 42 AMENDED DOCUMENT by Beall Concrete Enterprises Inc. Amendment to 41 SECTION DefendantSECTION's Rule Disclosure Objections. (Levine, Mark) Modified on (tln). (Entered 43 Minute Entry for proceedings held before Judge Reed C O'Connor Pretrial Conference held on Attorney Appearances SECTION PlaintiffSECTION - Devika Seth, Toby W. Costas; Defense - Mark J. Levine. (Court Reporter Debbie Saenz.) Time in Court 65 mins. (skt) (Entered 44 ORDER The Court determines that this case should be REFERRED to U.S. Magistrate Judge Irma Carrillo Ramirez for a court-ordered settlement conference to be conducted on April 3, 2008 at 9 00 a.m.. All counsel are directed to contact the chambers of Magistrate Judge Ramirez at 2393 no later than 5 00 p.m. March 28, 2008 to arrange all the details of the conference. The parties, as well as counsel, shall attend the settlement conference. (Signed by Judge Reed C O'Connor on (lmp) (Entered 45 ORDER Pursuant to the District Court's Order, filed March 26, 2008, this matter has been referred to the United States Magistrate Judge for a settlement conference. This Order will control all proceedings relating to the settlement conference in this case. Settlement Conference set for 09 00 AM before Magistrate Judge Irma C Ramirez. (see order for specifics) (Signed by Magistrate Judge Irma C Ramirez on (lmp) (Entered Minute Entry for proceedings held before Magistrate Judge Irma C Ramirez Settlement Conference held on Parties settled. Attorney Appearances SECTION PlaintiffSECTION - Devika Seth, Toby Costas; Defense - Mark Levine, Curt Lindeman. (Not recorded) Time in Court 3 hours. NO PDF ATTACHED - THIS IS A VIRTUAL MINUTE ENTRY. (lmm) (Entered 46 ORDER The Court has been notified that this case has settled. The parties are therefore directed to file the necessary dismissal papers (a stipulation of dismissal under FED. R. CIV. P. with the Clerk's Office within 15 days from the date of this order. (see order for specifics) (Signed by Judge Reed C O'Connor on (klm) (Entered 47 Consent Decree. (See Order for specifics) (Signed by Judge Reed C O'Connor on (skt) (Entered Summary: On September 28, 2006, The Dallas District Office of the EEOC filed this lawsuit in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Texas. The plaintiff sued Beall Concrete Enterprises, Inc., a wholly-owned subsidiary of U.S. Concrete, Inc. under the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990 and the Age Discrimination in Employment Act. On April 3, 2008, Judge Reed O'Connor approved a consent decree over the remaining claim that the defendant had violated the Age Discrimination in Employment Act. The consent decree required the defendant to pay the complainant in backpay, conduct ADEA training for its employees for two years, and post a notice about federal anti-discrimination employment laws.

On September 28, 2006, The Dallas District Office of the EEOC filed this lawsuit in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Texas. The plaintiff sued Beall Concrete Enterprises, Inc., a wholly-owned subsidiary of U.S. Concrete, Inc. under the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990 and the Age Discrimination in Employment Act. On April 3, 2008, Judge Reed O'Connor approved a consent decree over the remaining claim that the defendant had violated the Age Discrimination in Employment Act. The consent decree required the defendant to pay the complainant in backpay, conduct ADEA training for its employees for two years, and post a notice about federal anti-discrimination employment laws.

Using the provided source, generate a concise summary: SECTION Hall v. Best Buy Co. United States District Court for the District of Minnesota June 15, 2006, Decided ; June 15, 2006, Filed Civil File No. (MJD/AJB), Civil File No. 05-720 (MJD/AJB) Reporter 2006 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 40235 VERNE A. HALL, et al., SECTION PlaintiffSECTION s v. BEST BUY COMPANY, INC. and BEST BUY ENTERPRISE SERVICES, INC., SECTION DefendantSECTION s; JEFFERY LOEB, SECTION PlaintiffSECTION v. BEST BUY COMPANY, INC. and BEST BUY ENTERPRISE SERVICES, INC., SECTION DefendantSECTION s Subsequent History Motion granted by Hall v. Best Buy Co., 2006 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 56515 (D. Minn., Aug. 11, 2006) Summary judgment granted by Loeb v. Best Buy Co., 2007 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 58039 (D. Minn., Aug. 6, 2007) Counsel *1 Stephen J. Snyder, Gray Plant, Mooty, Mooty & Bennett, P.A., Counsel for SECTION PlaintiffSECTION s. David L. Shulman, Law Office of David L. Shulman, PLLC, Counsel for SECTION PlaintiffSECTION Jeffery Loeb. Judges Michael J. Davis, United States District Judge Opinion by Michael J. Davis Opinion ORDER These two cases are related. In the interest of judicial economy, the Court HEREBY ORDERS that the case captioned Loeb v. Best Buy, No. 05-720 (MJD/AJB) be closed, and that Loeb become part of the main case, Hall et al. v. Best Buy, No. (MJD/AJB). The Pretrial Scheduling Order issued in Hall and the amendments thereto shall now apply to Loeb also. Wood R. Foster, Jr., Siegel, Brill, Greupner, Duffy & Foster, P.A., Counsel for Opt-in SECTION PlaintiffSECTION s. Janet C. Evans, Robins, Kaplan, Miller & Ciresi, L.L.P. Counsel for SECTION DefendantSECTION s. Dated June 15, 2006 s/ Michael J. Davis United States District Court Summary: The case was brought by employees against their place of employment, Best Buy Co., seeking compensation for back pay and benefits, as well as reinstatement of old positions or a comparable financial award. Plaintiffs alleged that Best Buy had discriminated against them on the basis of their age. The case was dismissed on June 12, 2007 by Judge Michael J. Davis.

The case was brought by employees against their place of employment, Best Buy Co., seeking compensation for back pay and benefits, as well as reinstatement of old positions or a comparable financial award. Plaintiffs alleged that Best Buy had discriminated against them on the basis of their age. The case was dismissed on June 12, 2007 by Judge Michael J. Davis.

Using the provided source, generate a concise summary: SECTION CM/ECF - ncmd - Docket Report https 18AG, CASREF, CLOSED, MEDIATION U.S. District Court North Carolina Middle District (Durham) CIVIL DOCKET FOR CASE # 1 EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY COMMISSION v. QUIK-CHECK, INC. Assigned to CHIEF JUDGE JAMES A. BEATY, JR Referred to MAG/JUDGE RUSSELL A. ELIASON Cause 42 2000 Unlawful Employment Practices Date Filed Date Terminated Jury Demand Both Nature of Suit 442 Civil Rights Jobs Jurisdiction U.S. Government SECTION PlaintiffSECTION SECTION PlaintiffSECTION EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY COMMISSION represented by ZOE GABRIELE MAHOOD EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY COMM. 1309 ANNAPOLIS DR. RALEIGH, NC Fax Email [email protected] LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED GWENDOLYN YOUNG REAMS EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY COMMISSION 1801 L ST., N.W. WASHINGTON, DC 20507 ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED JAMES L. LEE EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY COMMISSION 1801 L ST., N.W. WASHINGTON, DC 20507 ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED LYNETTE A. BARNES EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY COMMISSION 129 W. TRADE ST., STE. 400 CHARLOTTE, NC 28202 Fax Email [email protected] ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED 1 of 5 1 40 PM CM/ECF - ncmd - Docket Report https V. SECTION DefendantSECTION QUIK-CHECK, INC. represented by BRIAN STEPHEN CLARKE NEXSEN PRUET ADAMS KLEEMEIER, PLLC POB 3463 GREENSBORO, NC 27402 Fax Email [email protected] LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED DENA BETH LANGLEY HAGAN DAVIS MANGUM BARRETT LANGLEY AND HALE, PLLC 300 N. GREENE ST., STE. 200 GREENSBORO, NC 27401 Fax Email [email protected] ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED Date Filed # Docket Text 1 COMPLAINT against QUIK-CHECK, INC., filed by EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY COMMISSION.(McClain, Abby) (Entered 2 CIVIL COVER SHEET, filed by EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY COMMISSION.(McClain, Abby) (Entered Notice of Right to Consent. (McClain, Abby) (Entered 3 NOTICE of Appearance by attorney DENA BETH LANGLEY on behalf of SECTION DefendantSECTION QUIK-CHECK, INC. (LANGLEY, DENA) (Entered 4 WAIVER of Service of Summons by SECTION DefendantSECTION QUIK-CHECK, INC.. (LANGLEY, DENA) (Entered 5 NOTICE of Appearance by attorney BRIAN STEPHEN CLARKE on behalf of SECTION DefendantSECTION QUIK-CHECK, INC. (CLARKE, BRIAN) (Entered 6 ANSWER to Complaint by QUIK-CHECK, INC..(LANGLEY, DENA) (Entered 7 AMENDED DOCUMENT by QUIK-CHECK, INC.. Amended Certificate of Service. (LANGLEY, DENA) (Entered 2 of 5 1 40 PM CM/ECF - ncmd - Docket Report https 8 NOTICE of Hearing Initial Pretrial Conference set for 09 30 AM in Winston-Salem Courtroom #3 before MAG/JUDGE RUSSELL A. ELIASON. (Williamson, Wanda) (Entered 9 Rule 26(f) Report (Joint) filed by all parties by EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY COMMISSION. (MAHOOD, ZOE) (Entered MOTIONS 9 Rule 26(f) Report (Joint) filed by all parties REFERRED to Mag/Judge Eliason. (Williamson, Wanda) (Entered 10 ORDER APPROVING JOINT RULE 26F REPORT that this case will be placed on a STANDARD Case Management Track. All discovery shall be completed by July 15, 2006. Notice of Intent to File Disp Motions are due by Mediation shall be conducted midway through discovery. Parties agree that the mediator shall be Kenneth P. Carlson, Jr. SECTION PlaintiffSECTION s Amended Pleadings and joinder of additional parties are due by SECTION DefendantSECTION s Amended Pleadings and joinder of additional parties are due by Parties have agreed that appointment of a magistrate is not appropriate for this case. ETT 3-4 days w/jury demand. Discovery due by. Signed by Judge RUSSELL A. ELIASON on (Simmonds, Lisa) (Entered CASE REFERRED to Mediation. (Gammon, Cheryl) (Entered MEDIATION SCHEDULING ORDER; Mediation due by (Gammon, Cheryl) (Entered SELECTION OF KENNETH P. CARLSON, JR. as mediator. (Gammon, Cheryl) (Entered 11 ORDER Appointing KENNETH P. CARLSON, JR., as the mediator pursuant to LR Signed by John S. Brubaker, Clerk of Court. (Gammon, Cheryl) (Entered 12 MOTION for Extension of Time to Respond to SECTION PlaintiffSECTION's First Set of Interrogatories, First Set of Requests for Production of Documents and First Set of Requests for Admissions by QUIK-CHECK, INC.. Responses due by (CLARKE, BRIAN) (Entered MOTIONS 12 MOTION for Extension of Time to Respond to SECTION PlaintiffSECTION's First Set of Interrogatories, First Set of Requests for Production of Documents and First Set of Requests for Admissions REFERRED to Judge Eliason. (Kemp, Donita) (Entered 13 ORDER Granting 12 Motion for Extension of Time for thirty (30) days, toand including April 12, 2006 within which SECTION DefendantSECTION may respond to SECTION PlaintiffSECTION's First Set Of Interrogatories, First Set Of Requests For Production Of Documents And First Set Of Requests For Admissions. Signed by Judge RUSSELL A. ELIASON on (Welch, Kelly) (Entered 14 MOTION for Extension of Time to Respond to SECTION DefendantSECTION's First Set of Interrogatories and Requests for Production of Documents by EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY COMMISSION. Responses due by (Attachments # 1 Text of Proposed Order)(MAHOOD, ZOE) (Entered 3 of 5 1 40 PM CM/ECF - ncmd - Docket Report https MOTIONS 14 MOTION for Extension of Time to Respond to SECTION DefendantSECTION's First Set of Interrogatories and Requests for Production of Documents REFERRED to Judge Eliason. (Kemp, Donita) (Entered 15 ORDER Granting 14 Motion for Extension of Time for SECTION PlaintiffSECTION to Respond to SECTION DefendantSECTION's First Set of Interrogatories and Requests for Production of Documents to and including April 5, 2006. Signed by Judge RUSSELL A. ELIASON on (Simmonds, Lisa) (Entered 16 NOTICE of Hearing Jury Trial set for 09 30 AM in Unassigned Courtroom; Set Trial Brief, etc. deadline to (Kemp, Donita) (Entered 17 REPORT of Mediator; Session completed by Mediator KENNETH P. CARLSON, JR. (CARLSON, KENNETH) (Entered Case Reported Settled at Mediation (Gammon, Cheryl) (Entered Set Deadlines/Hearings Stipulation of Dismissal due by (Gammon, Cheryl) (Entered Proposed Consent Decree REFERRED to Judge Beaty. (Kemp, Donita) (Entered 18 CONSENT DECREE that the SECTION DefendantSECTION shall not discriminate against any person on the basis of race or any other protected category within the meaning of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964; SECTION DefendantSECTION shall not discriminate or retaliate as set out; SECTION DefendantSECTION shall pay Wanda Smith the sum of in settlement of the claims raised in this action as set out; payment shall be made within fifteen (15) days after the Court approves this Consent Decree and shall be mailed as set out; SECTION DefendantSECTION's employment records of Wanda Smith shall be maintained as set out; within fifteen (15) days of the entry of this decree by the Court, SECTION DefendantSECTION agrees to provide Wanda Smith with a neutral letter of reference as set out; SECTION DefendantSECTION does not currently conduct business within the US or within any foreign jurisdiction; if SECTION DefendantSECTION resumes the operation of a business subject to Title VII jurisdiction within the US or within any foreign jurisdiction during the term of this Decree, SECTION DefendantSECTION agrees to provide as set out in paragraphs 7 through 10; in the event there is no activity to report pursuant to this paragraph, SECTION DefendantSECTION shall send EEOC a negative report indicating no activity; the Commission may review compliance with this Decree; the term of this Decree shall be for five (5) years from its entry by the Court; each party shall bear its own costs and attorney's fees; this Court shall retain jurisdiction of this cause for the reason set out; Signed by Judge JAMES A. BEATY JR. on Keayba) (Entered PACER Service Center Transaction Receipt 14 41 10 4 of 5 1 40 PM CM/ECF - ncmd - Docket Report https PACER Login Description Billable Pages hs0328 Docket Report 3 Client Code eeoc Search Criteria 1 Cost 0.24 5 of 5 1 40 PM Summary: The Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) filed this Title VII retaliation suit against Quik-Chek, Inc. on behalf of a black employee. The EEOC alleged that Quik-Chek had fired the employee in retaliation for complaining about racial discrimination and threatening litigation over the discrimination and the company's response to her complaints. The parties reached a settlement in mediation, which the Court entered as a consent decree. The decree provided to the employee and contained an array of injunctive provisions. Defendant had ceased business operations, and the decree included provisions, such as antidiscrimination training and EEOC reporting, that would activate if Defendant resumed business activities. The case is closed.

The Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) filed this Title VII retaliation suit against Quik-Chek, Inc. on behalf of a black employee. The EEOC alleged that Quik-Chek had fired the employee in retaliation for complaining about racial discrimination and threatening litigation over the discrimination and the company's response to her complaints. The parties reached a settlement in mediation, which the Court entered as a consent decree. The decree provided to the employee and contained an array of injunctive provisions. Defendant had ceased business operations, and the decree included provisions, such as antidiscrimination training and EEOC reporting, that would activate if Defendant resumed business activities. The case is closed.

Using the provided source, generate a concise summary: SECTION Marisol A. by Forbes v. Giuliani, 520 U.S. 1211 (1997) 117 S.Ct. 1694 Supreme Court of the United States MARISOL A., by Her Next Friend, James Alexander FORBES, Jr., et al., petitioners, v. Rudolph W. GIULIANI, Mayor of New York City, et al. No. | May 12, 1997. Case below, 104 F.3d 524. Opinion *1694 Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit denied. Parallel Citations 117 S.Ct. 1694 (Mem), 137 821, 65 USLW 3748, 65 USLW 3753 1 Summary: Plaintiffs, children in the custody of the New York City Child Welfare Administration ( CWA ), and children who, while not in the custody of CWA, are or will be at risk of abuse or neglect and whose status is known or should be known to CWA, sought declaratory and injunctive relief against both the city and state for systematic deficiencies that jeopardized their well-being. The case was filed on December 13, 1995, and the parties reached to two separate settlement agreements, one with the city and one with the state, on December 2, 1988. The plaintiffs returned to court in January 2001, seeking an order directing the state to comply with specific terms of the state settlement agreement. The court found that the state had acted with insufficient diligence in implementing the information management system, and therefore extended the terms of the agreement in this area and directed that the plaintiffs receive semi-annual reports. The defendants provided a January 2017 report to show that they were continuing to develop, implement, and update their information systems for child welfare needs. A year later, the court ended its supervision of the portions of the settlement that it had retained jurisdiction to enforce.

Plaintiffs, children in the custody of the New York City Child Welfare Administration ( CWA ), and children who, while not in the custody of CWA, are or will be at risk of abuse or neglect and whose status is known or should be known to CWA, sought declaratory and injunctive relief against both the city and state for systematic deficiencies that jeopardized their well-being. The case was filed on December 13, 1995, and the parties reached to two separate settlement agreements, one with the city and one with the state, on December 2, 1988. The plaintiffs returned to court in January 2001, seeking an order directing the state to comply with specific terms of the state settlement agreement. The court found that the state had acted with insufficient diligence in implementing the information management system, and therefore extended the terms of the agreement in this area and directed that the plaintiffs receive semi-annual reports. The defendants provided a January 2017 report to show that they were continuing to develop, implement, and update their information systems for child welfare needs. A year later, the court ended its supervision of the portions of the settlement that it had retained jurisdiction to enforce.

Using the provided source, generate a concise summary: SECTION The New Jersey State Central Registry An Assessment Center for the Study of Social Policy 1575 Eye Street, NW Washington, DC 20005 July 30, 2008 ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS The federal court-appointed Monitor (the Center for the Study of Social Policy) would like to thank the Department of Children and Families (DCF), specifically Arburta Jones, Diane Milan, Gabriel Spiler and the staff at the State Central Registry (SCR), for its help with conducting this review. Additionally, the Monitor would like to thank the members of the Study Team Cheryl MacDougal from DCF’s Quality Analysis and Information unit and Vinette Tate, Nancy Parello and Nicole Hellriegel from the New Jersey Office of the Child Advocate (OCA). THE NEW JERSEY CENTRAL STATE REGISTRY AN ASSESSMENT TABLE OF CONTENTS I. Introduction and Purpose of the Assessment.......................................................... 1 II. Methodology............................................................................................................... 4 III. Current Hotline Functioning................................................................................... 5 A. Volume and Sources of Calls to the SCR..................................................... 5 B. SCR Call Flow................................................................................................ 7 C. Operations.................................................................................................... 11 D. Quality Assurance........................................................................................ 12 E. SCR Workload Call Type and Duration................................................. 13 IV. Findings..................................................................................................................... 16 A. Decision-Making.......................................................................................... 16 B. Information Collection and Documentation.............................................. 26 C. Timeliness..................................................................................................... 32 D. Professionalism and Competence of SCR Screeners................................ 34 E. The Effect of Screener Certification.......................................................... 37 V. Factors Affecting Performance............................................................................... 43 A. Strengths of the SCR................................................................................... 43 B. Opportunities for Improvement................................................................. 43 VI. Recommendations.................................................................................................... 46 A. Policy............................................................................................................. 46 B. SCR Operations........................................................................................... 47 C. Staff Development........................................................................................ 48 Appendix A Methodology Appendix B 1. SCR Call Review Data Collection Instrument 2. SCR Focus Group Questions LIST OF FIGURES Figure 1. Number of Calls to the SCR by Month - July 2006 – July 5 2. Referral Sources for All Reports and Requests For Calendar Year 6 3. SCR Call Classification and Flow............................................................................. 10 4. Percent of Calls by Type............................................................................................. 13 5. Distribution of Call Duration..................................................................................... 14 6. Distribution of CWS Calls in Study Sample by Response Priority........................ 15 7. Distribution of CPS Calls in Study Sample by Response Priority......................... 15 8. Information Collected by SCR Screeners in Calls coded CPS Re Summary: Plaintiffs, who are children in the custody of the New Jersey Division of Youth and Family Services (DYFS), brought suit against the state alleging abuse, neglect, and lack of services. After the New York Times published several articles about the deaths of children in the care of DYFS due to lack of care, in 2003 the state entered into a settlement agreement providing for a systematic overhaul of the state child welfare system. The latest modification of the agreement was made in 2015 and remains in force.

Plaintiffs, who are children in the custody of the New Jersey Division of Youth and Family Services (DYFS), brought suit against the state alleging abuse, neglect, and lack of services. After the New York Times published several articles about the deaths of children in the care of DYFS due to lack of care, in 2003 the state entered into a settlement agreement providing for a systematic overhaul of the state child welfare system. The latest modification of the agreement was made in 2015 and remains in force.

Using the provided source, generate a concise summary: SECTION ·'. \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\..1 NELSON CHAN Chief Counsel 2 SUSAN SAYLOR Special Projects Counsel 3 DEPARTMENT OF FAIR EMPLOYMENT AND HOUSING (DFEH) 4 39141 Civic Center Drive, Suite 410 Fremont, CA 94538 5 Telephone (510) FilED ALAMEDA COUNTY MAR 1 6 2012 By --. &1fLuo f1 j, jfJ). 6 Attorneys for the DFEH Filing fee exempt, Gov. Code, § 6103 7 BY FAX 8 IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA 9 IN AND FOR THE COUNTY OF ALAMEDA. 10 caseNWj ~ 11 THE DEPARTMENT OF FAIR EMPLOYMENT) 1262 1 79 AND HOUSING, an agency of the State of ) 12 California, ) ) GROUP AND CLASS ACTION 13 SECTION PlaintiffSECTION,) COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES AND 14 ) INJUNCTIVE RELIEF vs. ) ) 15 LAW SCHOOL ADMISSION COUNCIL, INC., ) FEHA, Gov. Code, § 12900 et seq. and 16 a Delaware tax exempt corporation, and DOES ) Unruh Civil Rights Act, Civ. Code, § 51 et ONE through TEN, inclusive, ) seq. 17 ) SECTION DefendantSECTION s. ) 18 ----------------------------) Jury Trial Demanded ) 19 JOHN DOE, JANE DOE, PETER ROE, ) RAYMOND BANKS, KEVIN COLLINS, ) 20 RODNEY DECOMO-SCHMITT, ANDREW ) redacted, ELIZABETH HENNESSEY- ) 21 SEVERSON, OTILIA lOAN, ALEX JOHNSON,) NICHOLAS JONES, CAROLINE LEE, ) 22 ANDREW QUAN, STEPHEN SEMOS, ) GAZELLE TALESHPOUR, KEVIN ) 23 VIELBAUM, AUSTIN WHITNEY, and all other) similarly situated individuals, ) 24 Real Parties in Interest.~ 25 ----------------------------) 26 27 G) COURT PAPER St~t. of California Std. 113 R.v. 3·95 FE&H Auto mated -1- Dept. Fair Empl. & Hous. v. Law School Admission Council, Inc. (Whitney et aL) Group and Class Action Complaint for Damages and Injunctive Relief 1 SECTION PlaintiffSECTION DEPARTMENT OF FAIR EMPLOYMENT AND HOUSING (Department or 2 PFEH) alleges the following against defendant LAW SCHOOL ADMISSION COUNCIL, INC 3 (LSAC), a Delaware tax exempt Corporation, and DOES ONE through TEN, inclusive 4 PARTmS 5 1. DFEH is the state agency charged with enforcing the right of all Californians under 6 the Unruh Civil Rights Act (Unruh Act) (Civ. Code, § 51 et seq.) ''to the full and equal 7 accommodations, advantages, facilities, privileges, or services in all business establishments of every 8 kind whatsoever. (Civ. Code, § 51, subd. (a).) Government Code section 12948 makes a violation 9 of the Unruh Act a violation of the Fair Housing and Employment Act (FEHA) (Gov. Code, § 12900 10 et seq.). The FEHA empowers the DFEH to investigate and prosecute Unruh Act claims within the 11.state, including those that adversely affect, in a similar manner, a group or class. (Gov. Code, §§ 12 12961, 13 2. Each real party in interest, John Doe, Jane Doe, Peter Roe, Raymond Banks, Kevin 14 Collins, Rodney Decemo-Schmitt, Andrew redacted, Elizabeth Hennessey-Severson, Otilia loan, 15 Alex Johnson, Nicholas Jones, Caroline Lee, Andrew Quan, Stephen Semos, Gazelle Taleshpour, 16 Kevin Vielbaum, and Austin Whitney, applied to LSAC for reasonable accommodations on the Law 17 School Admissions Test (LSAT) between January and February Each real party 18 was denied a reasonable ac commodation, either in whole or in part, within this same time frame. At 19 the time of applYing for reasonable accommodations, each real party resided in California. 20 3. Real parties in interest John Doe, Jane Doe, and Peter Roe wish to participate in this 21 litigation anonymously. Each real party seeks to retain their privacy interest in the details of their 22 disability and need for accommodation. Each of these real parties has expressed a legitimate fear of 23 negative professional ramifications should their true names be associated with this litigation. A 24 motion requesting the court's permission to proceed under fictitious names for these two real parties 25 is filed concurrently with this complaint. 26 II 27 II *COURT PAPER Stale of California Std. 11' R.v. 3·95 FE&H Automated -2- Dept. Fair Empl. & Hous. v. Law School Admission Council, Inc. (Whitney et al.) Group and Class Action Complaint for Damages Summary: The California Department of Fair Employment and Housing filed this ongoing lawsuit on behalf of several LSAT test takers against the Law School Admissions Council (LSAC). The State claims that LSAC routinely denies reasonable accommodations to test takers with disabilities in violation of the California Unruh Civil Rights Act and the Americans with Disabilities Act. In 2014, the parties have agreed to a consent decree that the court approved.

The California Department of Fair Employment and Housing filed this ongoing lawsuit on behalf of several LSAT test takers against the Law School Admissions Council (LSAC). The State claims that LSAC routinely denies reasonable accommodations to test takers with disabilities in violation of the California Unruh Civil Rights Act and the Americans with Disabilities Act. In 2014, the parties have agreed to a consent decree that the court approved.

Using the provided source, generate a concise summary: SECTION CM/ECF LIVE - U.S. District Court ded https U.S. District Court District of Delaware (Wilmington) CIVIL DOCKET FOR CASE # 1 CLOSED Equal Employment Opportunity Commission v. I.G. Burton of Seaford LLC Assigned to Judge Sue L. Robinson Cause 29 626 Job Discrimination (Age) Date Filed Date Terminated Jury Demand Both Nature of Suit 442 Civil Rights Jobs Jurisdiction U.S. Government SECTION PlaintiffSECTION SECTION PlaintiffSECTION Equal Employment Opportunity Commission represented by Douglas Edward McCann U.S. Attorney's Office The Nemours Building 1007 Orange Street, Suite 700 P.O. Box 2046 Wilmington, DE (302) Fax (302) Email [email protected] LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED V. SECTION DefendantSECTION I.G. Burton of Seaford LLC a subsidiary of I.G. Burton & Company Inc. represented by Barry M. Willoughby Young, Conaway, Stargatt & Taylor The Brandywine Building 1000 West Street, 17th Floor P.O. Box 391 Wilmington, DE (302) Fax (302) Email [email protected] LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED Margaret M. DiBianca Young, Conaway, Stargatt & Taylor The Brandywine Building 1000 West Street, 17th Floor P.O. Box 391 1 of 4 3 52 PM CM/ECF LIVE - U.S. District Court ded https Wilmington, DE (302) Fax (302) Email [email protected] LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED Date Filed # Docket Text 1 COMPLAINT filed with Jury Demand against I.G. Burton of Seaford LLC Magistrate Consent Notice to Pltf. - filed by Equal Employment Opportunity Commission. (Attachments # 1 Civil Cover Sheet # 2 Acknowledgement of Consent Form)(ead, ) (Entered Summons Issued as to I.G. Burton of Seaford LLC on (ead, ) (Entered 2 Notice of Availability of a U.S. Magistrate Judge to Exercise Jurisdiction (ead, ) (Entered Case assigned to Judge Sue L. Robinson. Please include the initials of the Judge (SLR) after the case number on all documents filed. (bkb, ) (Entered 3 NOTICE of Appearance by Barry M. Willoughby on behalf of I.G. Burton of Seaford LLC (Willoughby, Barry) (Entered 4 ANSWER to Complaint with Jury Demand by I.G. Burton of Seaford LLC.(Willoughby, Barry) (Entered 5 ORDER, Setting Deadlines/Hearings Scheduling TeleConference set for 08 15 AM before Honorable Sue L. Robinson. Signed by Judge Sue L. Robinson on (rld) (Entered 6 NOTICE OF SERVICE of SECTION DefendantSECTION's Initial Disclosures Pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 26(a) by I.G. Burton of Seaford LLC.(Willoughby, Barry) (Entered 7 MOTION for Pro Hac Vice Appearance of Attorney Terrence R. Cook and Mary M. Tiernan - filed by Equal Employment Opportunity Commission. (McCann, Douglas) Additional attachment(s) added on (fmt, ). (Entered CORRECTING ENTRY The initial attachment to D.I. 7 did not have counsel's signature on the certificate of service. The initial attachment has been deleted and the proper one is now attached. (fmt) (Entered 8 Joint PROPOSED ORDER for Scheduling Order by Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, I.G. Burton of Seaford LLC. (Stafford, Michael) (Entered SO ORDERED, re 7 MOTION for Pro Hac Vice Appearance of Attorney Terrence R. Cook and Mary M. Tiernan filed by Equal Employment Opportunity Commission. Signed by Judge Sue L. Robinson on (rld) (Entered 2 of 4 3 52 PM CM/ECF LIVE - U.S. District Court ded https 9 SCHEDULING ORDER Case referred to the Magistrate Judge for the purpose of exploring ADR. Joinder of Parties due by Pleadings due by due by Motions due by in Limine due by to Motions in Limine due by Brief due Brief due Conference set for 04 30 PM in Courtroom 6B before Honorable Sue L. Robinson.,Jury Trial set for 09 30 AM in Courtroom 6B before Honorable Sue L. Robinson. Signed by Judge Sue L. Robinson on (rld) (Entered Minute Entry for proceedings held before Judge Sue L. Robinson Scheduling TeleConference held on (Court Reporter n/a.) (rld) (Entered 10 Joint STIPULATION TO EXTEND TIME Submission of Expert Witness Reports to June 18, 2007 - filed by I.G. Burton of Seaford LLC. (DiBianca, Margaret) (Entered SO ORDERED, re 10 Joint STIPULATION TO EXTEND TIME Submission of Expert Witness Reports due June 18, 2007, any rebuttal report(s) due filed by I.G. Burton of Seaford LLC. Signed by Judge Sue L. Robinson on (rld) (Entered 11 NOTICE OF SERVICE of SECTION DefendantSECTION's First Request for Production of Documents and SECTION DefendantSECTION's First Set of Interrogatories by I.G. Burton of Seaford LLC.(DiBianca, Margaret) (Entered 12 NOTICE to Take Deposition of John Collison on July 17, 2007 by I.G. Burton of Seaford LLC.(DiBianca, Margaret) (Entered 13 NOTICE to Take Deposition of Blair McMasters on July 17, 2007 by I.G. Burton of Seaford LLC.(DiBianca, Margaret) (Entered 14 NOTICE to Take Deposition of Richard Sachs on July 18, 2007 by I.G. Burton of Seaford LLC.(DiBianca, Margaret) (Entered 15 NOTICE to Take Deposition of Jennings Wooters on July 18, 2007 by I.G. Burton of Seaford LLC.(DiBianca, Margaret) (Entered 16 NOTICE OF SERVICE of Expert Disclosure by I.G. Burton of Seaford LLC.(DiBianca, Margaret) (Entered 17 Joint STIPULATION TO EXTEND TIME to Complete Fact Discovery to November 27, 2007 - filed by I.G. Burton of Seaford LLC. (DiBianca, Margaret) (Entered SO ORDERED, re 17 Joint STIPULATION TO EXTEND TIME to Complete Fact Discovery to November 27, 2007 filed by I.G. Burton of Seaford LLC; ReSetting Scheduling Order Deadlines Discovery due by Motions due by Brief due Brief due Reports from retained experts due rebuttal expert reports due The pretrial and trial previously scheduled are removed from the court's calendar at this time, to be rescheduled, if need be, upon resolution of the 3 of 4 3 52 PM CM/ECF LIVE - U.S. District Court ded https dispostive motion(s). Signed by Judge Sue L. Robinson on (rld) (Entered 18 NOTICE OF SERVICE of SECTION DefendantSECTION's Second Set of Interrogatories Directed to SECTION PlaintiffSECTION by I.G. Burton of Seaford LLC.(DiBianca, Margaret) (Entered 19 PROPOSED CONSENT JUDGMENT by Equal Employment Opportunity Commission. (McCann, Douglas) (Entered 20 CONSENT DECREE - (SEE ORDER FOR DETAILS) - Signed by Judge Sue L. Robinson on ***Civil Case Terminated. (rwc) (Entered PACER Service Center Transaction Receipt 16 52 23 PACER Login wu0079 Client Code eeoc Description Docket Report Search Criteria 1 Start date End date Billable 2 Pages Cost 0.16 4 of 4 3 52 PM Summary: The EEOC filed this Age Discrimination in Employment Act case against I.G. Burton of Seaford alleging that the defendant had fired an employee due to his age. The parties entered into a three-year consent decree. Under the decree, the defendant agreed to pay in damages to three former employees and provide training and take other steps to prevent further violations.

The EEOC filed this Age Discrimination in Employment Act case against I.G. Burton of Seaford alleging that the defendant had fired an employee due to his age. The parties entered into a three-year consent decree. Under the decree, the defendant agreed to pay in damages to three former employees and provide training and take other steps to prevent further violations.

Using the provided source, generate a concise summary: SECTION SECTION Case SECTION 1 As of 09 51 AM EDT 1 of 3 U.S. District Court District of Maryland (Baltimore) CIVIL DOCKET FOR CASE # 1 CLOSED Equal Employment Opportunity Commission v. Avado Brands, Inc. Assigned to Judge Richard D Bennett Cause 42 2000 Job Discrimination (Race) SECTION PlaintiffSECTION Date Filed Date Terminated Jury Demand SECTION PlaintiffSECTION Nature of Suit 442 Civil Rights Jobs Jurisdiction U.S. Government SECTION PlaintiffSECTION Equal Employment Opportunity Commission represented by Cecile Celeste Quinlan Equal Employment Opportunity Commission City Crescent Bldg 10 S Howard St Third Fl Baltimore, MD 21201 Fax Email [email protected] LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED Gerald S Kiel US Equal Employment Opportunity Commission City Crescent Bldg 10 S Howard St Third Fl Baltimore, MD 21201 Fax Email [email protected] ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED Gwendolyn Young Reams U S Equal Employment Opportunity Commission City Crescent Bldg 10 S Howard St Third Fl Baltimore, MD 21201 Fax Tracy Hudson Spicer Equal Employment Opportunity Commission City Crescent Bldg 10 S Howard St Third Fl Baltimore, MD 21201 Fax Email [email protected] ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED V. Intervenor SECTION PlaintiffSECTION Veronica Bowmaker represented by Kathleen M Cahill Law Offices of Kathleen M Cahill 15 E Chesapeake Ave Towson, MD 21286 SECTION Case SECTION 1 As of 09 51 AM EDT 2 of 3 Fax Email [email protected] ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED V. SECTION DefendantSECTION Avado Brands, Inc. doing business as Don Pablo's Restaurant Date Filed # Docket Text 1 COMPLAINT against Avado Brands, Inc., filed by Equal Employment Opportunity Commission.(nrm, Deputy Clerk) (Entered 2 Summons Issued (20 days) as to Avado Brands, Inc.. (nrm, Deputy Clerk) (Entered 3 Warning letter to counsel in re PDF Format requirements(nrm, Deputy Clerk) (Entered 4 MOTION to Intervene by veronica bowmaker. Responses due by (Attachments # 1 # 2 # 3 # Kathleen) (Entered 5 ORDER granting 4 Motion of Veronica Bowmaker to Intervene as an individual plaintiff. Signed by Judge Richard D Bennett on (jnl, Deputy Clerk) (Entered 6 INTERVENOR COMPLAINT, filed by Veronica Bowmaker.(jnl, Deputy Clerk) (Entered 7 JURY TRIAL DEMAND by Veronica Bowmaker. (jnl, Deputy Clerk) (Entered 8 SUMMONS Returned Executed by Equal Employment Opportunity Commission. Avado Brands, Inc. served on answer due (Quinlan, Cecile) (Entered 9 ORDER DIRECTING SECTION PlaintiffSECTION file and serve by mail on the SECTION DefendantSECTION a Motion for Entry of Default by the Clerk and a Motion for Default Judgment, or provide a Report as to why such motions would be inappropriate within 30 days of the date hereof. Signed by Judge Richard D Bennett on (jlb, Deputy Clerk) (Entered 10 SUGGESTION OF BANKRUPTCY Upon the Record as to Avado Brands, Inc. by Avado Brands, Inc.. (cags, Deputy Clerk) (Entered 11 MOTION for Default Judgment as to Avado Brands, Inc. d/b/a Don Pablo's Restaurant by Equal Employment Opportunity Commission. Responses due by (Attachments # 1 Text of Proposed Order for Default Judgment)(Spicer, Tracy) (Entered 12 ORDER STAYING this case pending disposition of the Bankruptcy Proceedings and ADMINISTRATIVELY CLOSING this case. Signed by Judge Richard D Bennett on (jlb, Deputy Clerk) (Entered 13 MOTION to Reopen Case by Equal Employment Opportunity Commission. Responses due by (Spicer, Tracy) (Entered 14 ORDER granting 13 Motion of SECTION PlaintiffSECTION for Reopening of Instant Case. Signed by Judge Richard D Bennett on (mcb, Deputy Clerk) (Entered 15 SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT Consent Decree for signature and entry by Court by Equal Employment Opportunity Commission. (Quinlan, Cecile) (Entered SECTION Case SECTION 1 As of 09 51 AM EDT 3 of 3 16 CONSENT DECREE and approval. Signed by Judge Richard D Bennett on (Attachments # 1 Exhibit A# 2 Exhibit B)(jlb, Deputy Clerk) (Entered Summary: On July 8, 2004, the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission filed a lawsuit in the District Court of Maryland, under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, against Avado Brands, Inc, alleging that it violated the terms of a prior Negotiated Settlement Agreement with the plaintiffs due to a racially hostile work environment. The parties entered into a consent decree where the defendant, among other things, agreed to pay

On July 8, 2004, the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission filed a lawsuit in the District Court of Maryland, under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, against Avado Brands, Inc, alleging that it violated the terms of a prior Negotiated Settlement Agreement with the plaintiffs due to a racially hostile work environment. The parties entered into a consent decree where the defendant, among other things, agreed to pay

Using the provided source, generate a concise summary: SECTION Case 1 Document 1 Filed Page 1 of 46 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF MARYLAND KNOW YOUR IX, a project of Advocates for Youth; COUNCIL OF PARENT ATTORNEYS AND ADVOCATES, INC.; GIRLS FOR GENDER EQUITY; and STOP SEXUAL ASSAULT IN SCHOOLS, SECTION PlaintiffSECTION s, -against- ELISABETH D. DEVOS, in her official capacity as United States Secretary of Education; KENNETH L. MARCUS, in his official capacity as Assistant Secretary for Civil Rights at the United States Department of Education; and UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION, SECTION DefendantSECTION s. Civil No. _______________ COMPLAINT FOR DECLARATORY AND INJUNCTIVE RELIEF INTRODUCTION 1. Nearly half a century since the passage of Title IX of the Education Amendments of 1972 (“Title IX”), sexual harassment and assault remain a widespread problem for students of all ages. In 1972, Congress delegated to SECTION DefendantSECTION U.S. Department of Education (“ED” or “the Agency”) the power and responsibility to hold educational institutions receiving federal funds accountable for their responses to sex discrimination. Since 1997, the Agency has set standards governing the responsibilities of funding recipients to address sexual harassment, including sexual assault, and to take steps to prevent it. Under statutes imposing virtually identical obligations, schools that receive federal funding have also been required to respond to and prevent harassment and assault on the basis of race, national origin, and Until now, 1 Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 (“Title VI”); Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973 (“Section 504”); Title II of the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990 (“Title II”). Compare Title VI, 42 1 Case 1 Document 1 Filed Page 2 of 46 ED has imposed the same responsibilities on recipients to respond to harassment based on sex that it imposes on them to respond to harassment based on race, national origin, and disability. With the promulgation of the Nondiscrimination on the Basis of Sex in Education Programs or Activities Receiving Federal Financial Assistance regulation (RIN Docket No. (the “Rule”), however, the Agency has radically reduced the responsibility of schools to respond to complaints of sexual harassment and assault, creating an arbitrary and wholly unexplained disparity between its treatment of sex discrimination on the one hand, and race, national origin, and disability discrimination on the other. 2. SECTION DefendantSECTION ED Secretary Elisabeth DeVos has discarded decades of ED’s experience addressing sexual harassment and assault by promulgating regulatory provisions that sharply limit educational institutions’ obligations to respond to reports of sexual harassment and assault. If allowed to be implemented at educational institutions nationwide, these provisions will make the promise of equal educational opportunities irrespective of sex even more elusive. This is true for all students, including students of color, LGBTQ students, and students with and without disabilities, in grade school, high school, and higher education. 3. Public statements by ED Secretary DeVos and former Deputy Assistant Secretary Candice Jackson echo the historical justifications and stereotypes that once animated the second- U.S.C. § 2000d (“No person in the United States shall, on the ground of race, color, or national origin, be excluded from participation in, be denied the benefits of, or be subjected to discrimination under any program or activity receiving Federal financial assistance.”); with Title IX, 20 U.S.C. § 1681 (“No person in the United States shall, on the basis of sex, be excluded from participation in, be denied the benefits of, or be subjected to discrimination under any education program or activity.”); and Section 504, 29 U.S.C. § 794(a) (“No otherwise qualified individual with a disability... shall, solely by reason of her or his disability, be excluded from the participation in, be denied the benefits of, or be subj Summary: On May 14, 2020 the plaintiffs filed a lawsuit against the Department of Education (ED) in the United States District Court in the District of Maryland. The complaint alleged that regulations issued by ED sharply limit educational institutions' obligations to respond to reports of sexual harassment and assault and therefore contravened Title IX of the Education Amendmentsof 1972. The case is ongoing with responses to the complaint due on July 31, 2020.

On May 14, 2020 the plaintiffs filed a lawsuit against the Department of Education (ED) in the United States District Court in the District of Maryland. The complaint alleged that regulations issued by ED sharply limit educational institutions' obligations to respond to reports of sexual harassment and assault and therefore contravened Title IX of the Education Amendmentsof 1972. The case is ongoing with responses to the complaint due on July 31, 2020.

Using the provided source, generate a concise summary: SECTION SECTION Case SECTION 1 As of 07 23 PM EDT 1 of 8 U.S. District Court Eastern District of New York (Brooklyn) CIVIL DOCKET FOR CASE # 1 CLOSED,IFP A.M. et al v. Mattingly Assigned to Judge Brian M. Cogan Cause 42 1201 Civil Rights (Disability) SECTION PlaintiffSECTION A.M. a minor, by her next friend CB Mobley Date Filed Date Terminated Jury Demand None Nature of Suit 446 Civil Rights Americans with Disabilities - Other Jurisdiction Federal Question represented by Leonard Matthew Braman NYC Law Department 100 Church Street New York, NY 10007 Fax Email [email protected] LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED Jordan Michael Engelhardt Patterson Belknap Webb & Tyler LLP 1133 Avenue of the Americas New York, NY 10036 Email [email protected] ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED Kimberly Forte Legal Aid Society 199 Water Street New York, NY 10038 Email [email protected] ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED Leonard M. Braman 1133 Avenue of the Americas New York, NY Fax ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED Lisa E. Cleary Patterson, Belknap, Webb & Tyler LLP 1133 Avenue of the Americas New York, NY 10036 (212) Fax (212) Email [email protected] ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED Lisa Freeman The Legal Aid Society 199 Water St New York, NY 10038 Fax Email [email protected] ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED SECTION Case SECTION 1 As of 07 23 PM EDT 2 of 8 SECTION PlaintiffSECTION M.M. a minor, by his next friend Cynthia Godsoe SECTION PlaintiffSECTION Nancy Rosenbloom The Legal Aid Society 199 Water Street, 3rd Floor New York, NY 10038 Fax Email [email protected] TERMINATED ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED Steven Banks Legal Aid Society 106th Street New York, NY 10029 Email [email protected] ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED William F. Schmedlin Patterson Belknap Webb & Tyler LLP 1133 Avenue of the Americas New York, NY Fax ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED represented by Leonard Matthew Braman (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED Jordan Michael Engelhardt (See above for address) ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED Kimberly Forte (See above for address) ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED Leonard M. Braman (See above for address) ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED Lisa E. Cleary (See above for address) ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED Nancy Rosenbloom (See above for address) TERMINATED ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED Steven Banks (See above for address) ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED William F. Schmedlin (See above for address) ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED represented by SECTION Case SECTION 1 As of 07 23 PM EDT 3 of 8 S.M. a minor, by his next friend Kinda Serafi; on behalf of themselves and all others similarly situated Leonard Matthew Braman (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED Jordan Michael Engelhardt (See above for address) ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED Kimberly Forte (See above for address) ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED Leonard M. Braman (See above for address) ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED Lisa E. Cleary (See above for address) ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED Nancy Rosenbloom (See above for address) TERMINATED ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED Steven Banks (See above for address) ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED William F. Schmedlin (See above for address) ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED V. SECTION DefendantSECTION John B. Mattingly in his official capacity as Commissioner of the New York City Administration for Children's Services represented by Carolyn Elizabeth Kruk NYC Law Department, General Litigation Division 100 Church Street New York, NY 10007 Fax Email [email protected] LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED Martha Anne Calhoun New York City Department of Law 100 Church Street New York, NY 10007 Fax Email [email protected] LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED David Alan Rosinus, Jr. New York City Law Department 100 Church Street New York, NY 10007 Fax SECTION Case SECTION 1 As of 07 23 PM EDT 4 of 8 Email [email protected] ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED Steven Douglas Weber Hoguet Newman Regal & Kenney, LLP 10 East 40th Street New York, NY 10016 Fax Email [email protected] TERMINATED Date Filed # Docket Text 1 COMPLAINT against John B. Mattingly Disclosure Statement on Civil Cover Sheet completed -yes, filed by A.M., S.M., M.M.. (Attachments # 1 Civil Cover Sheet) (Bowens, Priscilla) (Entered 2 MOTION for Leave to Proceed in forma pauperis by A.M., M.M., S.M.. (Bowens, Priscilla) (Entered Summons Issued as to John B. Mattingly. (Bowens, Priscilla) (Entered 3 Letter to Judge Cogan From Lisa E. Cleary Requesting That the Court Schedule a Pre-Motion Conference Regarding SECTION PlaintiffSECTION's Filing of a Motion for Class Certification by A.M., M.M., S.M. (Cleary, Lisa) (Entered 4 Unsigned Order to Show Cause for a Preliminary Injunction by A.M., M.M., S.M. (Attachments # 1 Declaration of Leslie Winston, L.M.S.W., # 2 Declaration of Clara Goetz, # 3 Declaration of Kimberly Forte) (Cleary, Lisa) (Entered 5 MEMORANDUM in Support re 4 Unsigned Order to Show Cause for a Preliminary Injunction filed by A.M., M.M., S.M.. (Cleary, Lisa) (Entered Minute Entry and Order for Status Conference held before Judge Brian M. Cogan on Both sides present. The Court will hold an evidentiary hearing on plaintiffs' motion for a preliminary injunction as to plaintiffs A.M., M.M., and S.M., on at 1 00 pm in Courtroom 4F North. The parties are to submit direct testimony by affidavits, which are to be exchanged by and if either side want to cross-examine any of the affiants, the affiants must be produced at the hearing. If the parties arrive at a plan to deal with the named plaintiffs, they may file a stipulation or place it on the record in lieu of the hearing. (Weisberg, Peggy) (Entered 6 SUMMONS Returned Executed by A.M., S.M., M.M.. John B. Mattingly served on answer due (Cleary, Lisa) (Entered 7 Subpoena by John B. Mattingly. (Weber, Steven) (Entered 8 NOTICE of Appearance by Leonard Matthew Braman on behalf of A.M., M.M., S.M. (aty to be noticed) (Braman, Leonard) (Entered 9 NOTICE of Appearance by Martha Anne Calhoun on behalf of John B. Mattingly (aty to be noticed) (Calhoun, Martha) (Entered 10 NOTICE of Appearance by Steven Douglas Weber on behalf of John B. Mattingly (aty to be noticed) (Weber, Steven) (Entered 11 STIPULATION re 4 Unsigned Order to Show Cause (Withdrawing Without Prejudice SECTION PlaintiffSECTION's Motion for Preliminary Injunctive Relief) by A.M., M.M., S.M. (Cleary, Lisa) (Entered ORDER re 11 Stipulation filed by S.M., M.M., A.M. The preliminary injunction hearing scheduled for 5/20 is canceled based on the parties' stipulation, which the Court will So Order and docket separately. Although the Court understands that the resolution is not final, the parties are to be congratulated for arriving at a common sense road map that at least presents the prospect of improving the difficult lives of these minors, something in which the Court believes both sides are interested in achieving. By separate Order, the Court will schedule an Initial Status Conference to SECTION Case SECTION 1 As of 07 23 PM EDT 5 of 8 address the final resolution of the case either consensually or by trial. Ordered by Judge Brian M. Cogan on (Cogan, Brian) (Entered 12 ORDER granting 2 Motion for Leave to Proceed in forma pauperis. In addition, the Court will hold an Initial Status Conference on at 9 30 a.m. in Chambers 717S. The joint summary letter requirement is waived, however the parties are required to bring to the conference a completed Civil Case Management Plan see attachment. Ordered by Judge Brian M. Cogan on (Weisberg, Peggy) (Entered 13 ANSWER to 1 Complaint by John B. Mattingly. (Weber, Steven) (Entered 14 STIPULATION and Proposed Order for Class Certification by A.M., M.M., S.M. (Cleary, Lisa) (Entered 15 STIPULATION AND ORDER for Class Certification. Ordered by Judge Brian M. Cogan. See attached for details. (Abdallah, Fida) (Entered Minute Entry and Order for Initial Status Conference held before Judge Brian M. Cogan on Both sides present. The parties' Civil Case Management plan was adopted and will be docketed separately. Fact discovery to be completed by (Weisberg, Peggy) (Entered 16 SCHEDULING ORDER/Case Management Plan is hereby adopted. ( Ordered by Judge Brian M. Cogan on ) (Guzzi, Roseann) (Entered 17 ORDER dated re 11 Stipulation filed. ( Ordered by Judge Brian M. Cogan on ) (Guzzi, Roseann) (Entered 18 STIPULATION and (Proposed) Protective Order by A.M., M.M., S.M. (Cleary, Lisa) (Entered 19 STIPULATION AND PROTECTIVE ORDER re 18 Stipulation and (Proposed) Protective Order. ( Ordered by Judge Brian M. Cogan on ) (Guzzi, Roseann) (Entered 20 Letter from Lisa E. Cleary to Judge Cogan enclosing Stipulation and Order of Settlement for review and requesting court schedule a conference by A.M., M.M., S.M. (Attachments # 1 STIPULATION and (Proposed) Order of Settlement) (Cleary, Lisa) (Entered ORDER re 20 Letter, filed by plaintiffs. There is no reason to hold the conference before the parties file their proposed notice. The conference will be held promptly after it is filed, perhaps in a matter of hours but no more than several days. Ordered by Judge Brian M. Cogan on (Cogan, Brian) (Entered 21 Letter providing the Court with supplemental information to accompany the filed papers seeking preliminary approval of the Stipulation and Order of Settlement and approval of the agreed-upon notice and notice procedures by A.M., M.M., S.M. (Attachments # 1 Declaration of Lisa E. Cleary in Support of Preliminary Approval of the Settlement, # 2 Declaration of Next Friend (Kinda Serafi), # 3 Declaration of Next Friend (Cynthia Godsoe), # 4 Declaration of Next Friend (Charla Beth Mobley), # 5 Memorandum of Law in Support of SECTION PlaintiffSECTION's Motion for Preliminary Approval of Settlement and Approval of Notice, # 6 Consent Order Pursuant to Fed.R.Civ.P. Rule 23(e)) (Cleary, Lisa) (Entered 22 MOTION for Settlement (for Preliminary Approval of Settlement and Approval of Notice) by A.M., M.M., S.M.. (Cleary, Lisa) (Entered SCHEDULING ORDER The Court will hold a telephone conference TODAY, Parties will jointly call Chambers at at 12 noon. Ordered by Judge Brian M. Cogan on (Weisberg, Peggy) (Entered Minute Entry and Order for telephone conference held before Judge Brian M. Cogan on Both sides present. Parties are to submit a joint letter by regarding the implications of class certification on notice requirements as discussed. See transcript for details. (Court Reporter Marie Foley). (Weisberg, Peggy) (Entered SECTION Case SECTION 1 As of 07 23 PM EDT 6 of 8 23 Letter to Judge Cogan, dated November 19, 2010 by A.M., M.M., S.M. (Cleary, Lisa) (Entered 24 ORDER re 21 Letter by A.M., M.M., S.M. The Court, having reviewed the parties' proposed Stipulation of Settlement and supporting documentation, preliminary approves the settlement and directs the parties to distribute notice in the original and complete format required under paragraphs 2, 3, 4, and 6 of the Consent Order by and post notice in the secondary format required by paragraph 1 of the Consent Order, by SECTION DefendantSECTION will serve notice on the New York Attorney General by and file proof of service. Any objections must be submitted, in the manner stated in the Settlement Notice, by The parties are directed to file a motion for final settlement approval, addressing the Grinnell factors, see City of Detroit v. Grinnell Corp., 495 F.2d 448 (2d overruled on other grounds by, Missouri v. Jenkins, 491 U.S. 274, 109 S.Ct. 2463 by The Court will hold a fairness hearing on at 9 30 a.m. in Courtroom N4F. Ordered by Judge Brian M. Cogan on (Clarke, Melonie) (Entered 25 NOTICE of Appearance by David Alan Rosinus, Jr on behalf of John B. Mattingly (aty to be noticed) (Rosinus, David) (Entered 26 NOTICE by John B. Mattingly of Proposed Class Action Settlement Under 28 U.S.C. § 1715 (Attachments # 1 Exhibit A Complaint, # 2 Exhibit B Proposed Rule Notice, # 3 Exhibit C Proposed Stipulation and Order of Settlement, # 4 Exhibit D Stipulation and Order for Class Certification, # 5 Exhibit E Consent Order Pursuant to Rule 23(e)) (Rosinus, David) (Entered 27 CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE by John B. Mattingly re 26 Notice(Other), Notice(Other) of Proposed Class Action Settlement Under 28 U.S.C. § 1715 (Rosinus, David) (Entered Reset Hearing Time Fairness Hearing set for 9 30 a.m. on is reset to 2 15 PM in Courtroom 4F North. (Weisberg, Peggy) (Entered 28 DECLARATION of David A. Rosinus, Jr. in support of the proposed settlement by John B. Mattingly (Attachments # 1 Exhibit A Declaration of Francene Mann, # 2 Exhibit B Declaration of Michael Hannon, # 3 Exhibit C Memorandum from Deirdre Newton of NYC HHC) (Rosinus, David) (Entered 29 MOTION for Settlement Notice of SECTION PlaintiffSECTION s' Motion for Final Approval of Proposed Settlement by A.M., M.M., S.M.. (Attachments # 1 Proposed Order) (Cleary, Lisa) (Entered 30 MEMORANDUM in Support re 29 MOTION for Settlement Notice of SECTION PlaintiffSECTION s' Motion for Final Approval of Proposed Settlement filed by A.M., M.M., S.M.. (Cleary, Lisa) (Entered 31 AFFIDAVIT/DECLARATION in Support re 29 MOTION for Settlement Notice of SECTION PlaintiffSECTION s' Motion for Final Approval of Proposed Settlement Declaration of Lisa E. Cleary in Support of Final Approval of Proposed Settlement filed by A.M., M.M., S.M.. (Cleary, Lisa) (Entered 32 AFFIDAVIT/DECLARATION in Support re 29 MOTION for Settlement Notice of SECTION PlaintiffSECTION s' Motion for Final Approval of Proposed Settlement Declaration of Next Friend Cynthia Godsoe filed by A.M., M.M., S.M.. (Cleary, Lisa) (Entered 33 AFFIDAVIT/DECLARATION in Support re 29 MOTION for Settlement Notice of SECTION PlaintiffSECTION s' Motion for Final Approval of Proposed Settlement Declaration of Next Friend C.B. Mobley in Support of Motion filed by A.M., M.M., S.M.. (Cleary, Lisa) (Entered 34 AFFIDAVIT/DECLARATION in Support re 29 MOTION for Settlement Notice of SECTION PlaintiffSECTION s' Motion for Final Approval of Proposed Settlement Declaration of Next Friend Kinda Serafi in Support of Motion filed by A.M., M.M., S.M.. (Cleary, Lisa) (Entered 35 STIPULATION re 29 MOTION for Settlement Notice of SECTION PlaintiffSECTION s' Motion for Final Approval of Proposed Settlement ; Stipulation and (Proposed) Order of Settlement by SECTION Case SECTION 1 As of 07 23 PM EDT 7 of 8 A.M., M.M., S.M. (Cleary, Lisa) (Entered Minute Entry for Fairness Hearing held on before Judge Brian M. Cogan. Counsel for both sides present. No objections were made to the proposed settlement. The Court approved the terms of the Stipulation of Settlement entered into between and among the parties to this litigation as fair and reasonable. The Consent Judgment will be separately entered. The parties will file a proposed stipulation of settlement for the claims of individual named plaintiffs by and the Court will hold an infant compromise hearing on at 11 00 a.m. in Courtroom 8D South. See transcript for details. (Court reporter Michele Nardone.) (Weisberg, Peggy) (Entered 36 ORDER Approving Settlement re 29 Motion for Settlement. ( Ordered by Judge Brian M. Cogan on ) (Guzzi, Roseann) (Entered 37 Stipulation and Order of Settlement. ( Ordered by Judge Brian M. Cogan on ) (Guzzi, Roseann) (Entered 38 Letter from Lisa E. Cleary to Judge Cogan requesting an extension of time to submit papers in support of settlement by A.M., M.M., S.M. (Cleary, Lisa) (Entered ORDER GRANTING 38 Letter requesting an extension of time to submit papers in support of settlement to Infant Compromise Hearing is adjourned to at 4 30 pm in Courtroom 8D South. Ordered by Judge Brian M. Cogan on (Weisberg, Peggy) (Entered 39 Letter to Judge Cogan requesting an additional three week extension to submit papers in support of the settlement and adjournment of the infant compromise hearing by A.M., M.M., S.M. (Cleary, Lisa) (Entered ORDER re 39 Letter extending time to submit papers in support of settlement to 6/10. Infant Compromise Hearing is rescheduled for at 11 30 AM in Courtroom 8D South. Ordered by Judge Brian M. Cogan on (Clarke, Melonie) (Entered 40 MOTION for Attorney Fees by A.M., M.M., S.M.. (Attachments # 1 Declaration of Lisa Cleary, # 2 Stipulation and Proposed Order of Settlement as to Attorneys' Fees) (Cleary, Lisa) (Entered 41 MEMORANDUM in Support re 40 MOTION for Attorney Fees filed by A.M., M.M., S.M.. (Cleary, Lisa) (Entered 42 MOTION for Approval of Infant Compromise by A.M., M.M., S.M.. (Attachments # 1 Declaration of Lisa Cleary, # 2 Declaration of Kinda Serafi, # 3 Declaration of Cynthia Godsoe, # 4 Declaration of Charla Beth Mobley, # 5 Proposed Order) (Cleary, Lisa) (Entered 43 Letter regarding counsel by A.M., M.M., S.M. (Rosenbloom, Nancy) (Entered MINUTE ENTRY AND ORDER for infant compromise hearing held before Judge Brian M. Cogan on For the reasons stated on the record, the Court approves the settlement and grants leave to establish the described trusts for S.M., A.M., and M.M. conditional upon the filing of a successful motion for the Court's appointment of plaintiffs' next friends. See transcript for details (Court reporter Lisa Schmid). (Weisberg, Peggy) (Entered 44 Letter Motion on consent regarding confirmation and appointment of Next Friends by A.M., M.M., S.M. (Cleary, Lisa) (Entered 45 Letter amending the previously filed Letter Motion on consent regarding confirmation and appointment of Next Friends by A.M., M.M., S.M. (Cleary, Lisa) (Entered 46 STIPULATION AND ORDER OF SETTLEMENT AS TO ATTORNEY FEES re 40 Motion for Attorney Fees. ( Ordered by Judge Brian M. Cogan on ) (Guzzi, Roseann) (Entered SECTION Case SECTION 1 As of 07 23 PM EDT 8 of 8 47 ORDER re retroactively appoint Kinda Serafi, Cynthia Godsoe, and Charla Beth Mobley as next friends for the infant-plaintiffs S.M., M.M., and A.M. ( Ordered by Judge Brian M. Cogan on ) (Guzzi, Roseann) (Entered 48 ORDER OF COMPROMISE re 42 Motion for Approval of Infant Compromise. ( Ordered by Judge Brian M. Cogan on ) (Guzzi, Roseann) (Entered 49 ORDER/Memorandum of Understanding. ( Ordered by Judge Brian M. Cogan on ) (Guzzi, Roseann) (Entered 50 ORDER dated re retroactively appoint Kinda Serafi, Cynthia Godsoe, and Charla Beth Mobley and next friends for the infant-plaintiffs S.M., M.M., and A.M., respectively. ( Ordered by Judge Brian M. Cogan on ) (Guzzi, Roseann) (Entered 51 ENDORSED STIPULATION AND ORDER OF SETTLEMENT AND DISCONTINUANCE AS TO INDIVIDUALLY NAMED PLTFFS on document #42-1, the claims of the Individually Named Pltffs for damages resulting from the facts alleged in this action are hereby dismissed, with prejudice, and without costs, expenses, or fees in excess of the amount in paragraph 2 below. The Deft hereby agrees to pay to the Individually Named Pltffs, within 90 days of the so-ordering of this Stipulation and Order of Settlement and Discontinuance and receipt of all papers necessary to effectuate the settlement as follows to Pltff A.M., the sum of to Pltff M.M., the sum of and to Pltff S.M., the sum of (Ordered by Judge Brian M. Cogan on c/m (Galeano, Sonia) (Entered 52 NOTICE of Appearance by Carolyn Elizabeth Kruk on behalf of All SECTION DefendantSECTION s (aty to be noticed) (Kruk, Carolyn) (Entered 53 Joint MOTION to Alter Judgment by A.M.. (Attachments # 1 Proposed Order Amending Stipulation) (Freeman, Lisa) (Entered 54 AMENDMENT NO. 1 to Stipulation and Order of Settlement re 53 Motion to Alter Judgment. ( Ordered by Judge Brian M. Cogan on ) (Guzzi, Roseann) (Entered Summary: This was a class action challenge to New York's unnecessary institutionalization of children in foster care in psychiatric facilities. The initial settlement agreement, entered on February 28, 2011, provided for increased community-based placement opportunities for children in foster care with mental illness as well as individualized planning, staff training, and monitoring. In addition to the initial settlement agreement, on July 7, 2011, the plaintiffs agreed to release defendants from all liability in exchange for payment from defendants. On January 22, 2016, the parties agreed to extend the Court's jurisdiction until June 30, 2016, at which time its jurisdiction presumably expired.

This was a class action challenge to New York's unnecessary institutionalization of children in foster care in psychiatric facilities. The initial settlement agreement, entered on February 28, 2011, provided for increased community-based placement opportunities for children in foster care with mental illness as well as individualized planning, staff training, and monitoring. In addition to the initial settlement agreement, on July 7, 2011, the plaintiffs agreed to release defendants from all liability in exchange for payment from defendants. On January 22, 2016, the parties agreed to extend the Court's jurisdiction until June 30, 2016, at which time its jurisdiction presumably expired.

Using the provided source, generate a concise summary: SECTION Case 1 Document <docnum> Filed <datefiled> Page 1 of 6 MEDIATION,TERMED U.S. District Court District of Idaho (LIVE Database)Version 5.1.1 (Boise - Southern) CIVIL DOCKET FOR CASE # 1 The Associated Press et al v. Otter et al Assigned to Judge Edward J. Lodge Referred to Judge Candy W. Dale (Settlement) Case in other court Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals, Cause 42 1983 Civil Rights Act SECTION PlaintiffSECTION Date Filed Date Terminated Jury Demand None Nature of Suit 440 Civil Rights Other Jurisdiction Federal Question The Associated Press a New York corporation represented by Charles A Brown PO Box 1225 Lewiston, ID 83501 (208) Fax Email [email protected] ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED SECTION PlaintiffSECTION Idaho Statesman Publishing, LLC a Delaware limited liability company doing business as The Idaho Statesman represented by Charles A Brown (See above for address) ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED SECTION PlaintiffSECTION Lee Enterprises, Incorporated a Delaware corporation doing business as The Times-News represented by Charles A Brown (See above for address) ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED SECTION PlaintiffSECTION The Idaho Press Club, Inc. an Idaho corporation represented by Charles A Brown (See above for address) ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED SECTION PlaintiffSECTION Pioneer Newspapers, Inc. a Nevada corporation doing business as Idaho Press-Tribune, Idaho State Journal, Standard Journal, Teton Valley News, The News-Examiner, The Preston Citizen, and Messenger Index represented by Charles A Brown (See above for address) ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED SECTION PlaintiffSECTION TPC Holdings, Inc. an Idaho corporation doing business as Lewiston Tribune and Moscow-Pullman Daily News represented by Charles A Brown (See above for address) ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED SECTION PlaintiffSECTION Bar Bar Inc. an Idaho corporation doing business as Boise Weekly represented by Charles A Brown (See above for address) ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED Case 1 Document <docnum> Filed <datefiled> Page 2 of 6 SECTION PlaintiffSECTION Cowles Publishing Company a Washington corporation doing business as The Spokesman Review represented by Charles A Brown (See above for address) ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED SECTION PlaintiffSECTION Idahoans for Openness in Government, Inc. an Idaho non-profit corporation represented by Charles A Brown (See above for address) ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED V. SECTION DefendantSECTION C.L. (Butch) Otter in his official capacity as the Governor of the State of Idaho SECTION DefendantSECTION Robin Sandy in her official capacity as the Idaho Board of Correction SECTION DefendantSECTION Howard G. J.R.qVan Tassel in his official capacity as the Idaho Board of Correction SECTION DefendantSECTION Jay L. Nielsen in his official capacity as the Idaho Board of Correction represented by Michael S Gilmore OFFICE OF ATTORNEY GENERAL Statehouse Rm 210 Boise, ID 83720 (208) Fax (208) Email [email protected] LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED represented by Mark Alan Kubinski IDAHO DEPT OF CORRECTION 1299 N Orchard #110 Boise, ID 83706 (208) Fax (208) Email [email protected] LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED Michael S Gilmore (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED represented by Mark Alan Kubinski (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED Michael S Gilmore (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED represented by Mark Alan Kubinski (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED Michael S Gilmore (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED Case 1 Document <docnum> Filed <datefiled> Page 3 of 6 SECTION DefendantSECTION Brent D. Reinke in his official capacity as the Director of the Idaho Department of Correction SECTION DefendantSECTION Kevin Kempf in his official capacity as Division Chief of Operations of the Idaho Department of Correction represented by Mark Alan Kubinski (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED Michael S Gilmore (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED represented by Mark Alan Kubinski (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED Michael S Gilmore (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED Date Filed # Docket Text 1 COMPLAINT for Declaratory Judgment and Injunctive Relief against All SECTION DefendantSECTION s ( Filing fee $ 350 receipt number filed by All SECTION PlaintiffSECTION s. (Attachments # 1 Exhibit Exhibits A, B, C, D, E, and F to Complaint, # 2 Cover Sheet, # 3 Summons C.L. (Butch) Otter, # 4 Summons Robin Sandy, # 5 Summons Howard G. J.R. Van Tassel, # 6 Summons Jay L. Nielsen, # 7 Summons Brent D. Reinke, # 8 Summons Kevin Kempf)(Brown, Charles) 2 MOTION to Expedite SECTION PlaintiffSECTION s' Expedited Motion for Preliminary Injunction Charles A Brown appearing for SECTION PlaintiffSECTION s Bar Bar Inc., Cowles Publishing Company, Idaho Statesman Publishing, LLC, Idahoans for Openness in Government, Inc., Lee Enterprises, Incorporated, Pioneer Newspapers, Inc., TPC Holdings, Inc., The Associated Press, The Idaho Press Club, Inc.. Responses due by (Attachments # 1 Memorandum in Support of SECTION PlaintiffSECTION's Expedited Motion for Preliminary Injunction)(Brown, Charles) 3 ORDER OF RECUSAL. Judge Ronald E Bush recused. It is therefore HEREBY REQUESTED that the above-captioned case be reassigned. Signed by Judge Ronald E Bush. (caused to be mailed to non Registered Participants at the addresses listed on the Notice of Electronic Filing (NEF) by (krb) DOCKET ENTRY NOTICE of Case Number Change, Case reassigned to Judge Edward J. Lodge for all further proceedings. Please use this case number on all future pleadings, 1 re 3 ORDER OF RECUSAL (krb) 4 Summons Issued as to Kevin Kempf, Jay L. Nielsen, C.L. (Butch) Otter, Brent D. Reinke, Robin Sandy, Howard G. J.R.qVan Tassel. (Print attached Summons for service.) (Attachments # 1 Summons issued, # 2 Summons issued, # 3 Summons issued, # 4 Summons issued, # 5 Summons issued)(dks) NOTICE Pursuant to FRCP 7.1 you are required to file a Corporate Disclosure Statement with the Clerk's Office. You can do this by choosing the category Other Documents, then select Corporate Disclosure Statement. (dks) 5 ORDER granting 2 Motion to Expedite the motion for preliminary injunction; Response ddl 5 00 p.m. on Reply ddl 5 00 p.m. on This matter is referred for a court ordered mediation with Chief United States Magistrate Judge Candy W. Dale on or before June 1, 2012.. Signed by Judge Edward J. Lodge. (caused to be mailed to non Registered Participants at the addresses listed on the Notice of Electronic Filing (NEF) by (dks) Case 1 Document <docnum> Filed <datefiled> Page 4 of 6 6 NOTICE of Appearance by Michael S Gilmore on behalf of All SECTION DefendantSECTION s (Gilmore, Michael) 7 ORDER, (A Judicially Supervised Mediation Conference set for 09 30 AM in Boise - Courtroom 6 before Judge Candy W Dale.). Signed by Judge Candy W Dale. (caused to be mailed to non Registered Participants at the addresses listed on the Notice of Electronic Filing (NEF) by (dks) 8 MEMORANDUM in Opposition re 2 MOTION to Expedite SECTION PlaintiffSECTION s' Expedited Motion for Preliminary Injunction filed by Kevin Kempf, Jay L. Nielsen, C.L. (Butch) Otter, Brent D. Reinke, Robin Sandy, Howard G. J.R.qVan Tassel. Replies due by (Attachments # 1 Declaration of Zmuda, # 2 Exhibit Exhibit 1 to Zmuda Declaration, # 3 Declaration of Blades)(Gilmore, Michael) 9 SUMMONS Returned Executed by The Associated Press. All SECTION DefendantSECTION s. (Attachments # 1 Affidavit of Service - Sandy, # 2 Affidavit of Service - Van Tassel, # 3 Affidavit of Service - Nielsen, # 4 Affidavit of Service - Reinke, # 5 Affidavit of Service - Kempf)(Brown, Charles) 10 Corporate Disclosure Statement by Bar Bar Inc., Cowles Publishing Company, Idaho Statesman Publishing, LLC, Idahoans for Openness in Government, Inc., Lee Enterprises, Incorporated, Pioneer Newspapers, Inc., TPC Holdings, Inc., The Associated Press, The Idaho Press Club, Inc. identifying Corporate Parent The McClatchy Company for Idaho Statesman Publishing, LLC.. (Brown, Charles) 11 SUPPLEMENT by SECTION DefendantSECTION s Kevin Kempf, Jay L. Nielsen, C.L. (Butch) Otter, Brent D. Reinke, Robin Sandy, Howard G. J.R.qVan Tassel re 8 Memorandum in Opposition to Motion,. (Gilmore, Michael) Modified on to create a relationship to Doc #2 (dks). 12 NOTICE of Appearance by Mark A Kubinski on behalf of Kevin Kempf, Jay L. Nielsen, Brent D. Reinke, Robin Sandy, Howard G. J.R.qVan Tassel (Kubinski, Mark) 13 Docket Text Minute Entry for proceedings held before Judge Candy W Dale Judicially Supervised Mediation Conference held on Counsel/parties appeared and negotiated in good faith under the Court's direction and supervision. No resolution reached. Time in Court 4 hours. (Hearing not recorded.) (ah) 14 REPLY to Response to Motion re 2 MOTION to Expedite SECTION PlaintiffSECTION s' Expedited Motion for Preliminary Injunction PLAINTIFFS MOTION TO FILE OVER-LENGTH RESPONSE TO DEFENDANTS OPPOSITION DKT8 TO EXPEDITED MOTION FOR PRELIMINARY INJUNCTION DKT2 &STATUTORY SUPPLEMENT DKT 11 filed by Bar Bar Inc., Cowles Publishing Company, Idaho Statesman Publishing, LLC, Idahoans for Openness in Government, Inc., Lee Enterprises, Incorporated, Pioneer Newspapers, Inc., TPC Holdings, Inc., The Associated Press, The Idaho Press Club, Inc.. (Attachments # 1 Part 2 of SECTION PlaintiffSECTION s' Response)(Brown, Charles) 15 REPLY to Response to Motion re 2 MOTION to Expedite SECTION PlaintiffSECTION s' Expedited Motion for Preliminary Injunction Affidavit of Betsy Russell filed by Bar Bar Inc., Cowles Publishing Company, Idaho Statesman Publishing, LLC, Idahoans for Openness in Government, Inc., Lee Enterprises, Incorporated, Pioneer Newspapers, Inc., TPC Holdings, Inc., The Associated Press, The Idaho Press Club, Inc.. (Attachments # 1 James A. Ellington - Hanged, # 2 Ed, Rice Dies on Scaffold, # 3 Connors Meets Death Bravely, # 4 Bond Pays the Death Penalty for Murder of Charles Daly, # 5 To Be Hanged By Neck Until Dead, # 6 Murderer Seward Goes to His Death Without a Tremor, # 7 Jurko is Hanged at State Prison)(Brown, Charles) 16 MOTION to Take Judicial Notice Charles A Brown appearing for SECTION PlaintiffSECTION s Bar Bar Inc., Cowles Publishing Company, Idaho Statesman Publishing, LLC, Idahoans for Openness in Government, Inc., Lee Enterprises, Incorporated, Pioneer Newspapers, Inc., TPC Holdings, Inc., The Associated Press, The Idaho Press Club, Inc.. Responses due by (Attachments # 1 PLAINTIFFS MOTION TO FILE OVER-LENGTH RESPONSE TO DEFENDANTS OPPOSITION DKT8 TO EXPEDITED MOTION FOR PRELIMINARY INJUNCTION DKT2 &STATUTORY SUPPLEMENT DKT 11 )(Brown, Charles) Case 1 Document <docnum> Filed <datefiled> Page 5 of 6 17 MEMORANDUM in Opposition re 16 MOTION to Take Judicial Notice and Motion to File Overlength Response Dkt. 16-1 filed by Kevin Kempf, Jay L. Nielsen, C.L. (Butch) Otter, Brent D. Reinke, Robin Sandy, Howard G. J.R.qVan Tassel. Replies due by Michael) 18 REPLY to Response to Motion re 2 MOTION to Expedite SECTION PlaintiffSECTION s' Expedited Motion for Preliminary Injunction, 16 MOTION to Take Judicial Notice PLAINTIFFS RESPONSE TO DEFENDANTS OPPOSITION DKT 17 TO 1) PLAINTIFFS REQUEST FOR JUDICIAL NOTICE DKT 16 &2) PLAINTIFFS MOTION TO FILE OVER-LENGTH RESPONSE, ETC. DKT 16-1 filed by Bar Bar Inc., Cowles Publishing Company, Idaho Statesman Publishing, LLC, Idahoans for Openness in Government, Inc., Lee Enterprises, Incorporated, Pioneer Newspapers, Inc., TPC Holdings, Inc., The Associated Press, The Idaho Press Club, Inc..(Brown, Charles) 19 ORDER denying 2 Expedited Motion for Preliminary Injunction filed by Idahoans for Openness in Government, Inc., Idaho Statesman Publishing, LLC, The Idaho Press Club, Inc., Pioneer Newspapers, Inc., The Associated Press, Bar Bar Inc., Lee Enterprises, Incorporated, TPC Holdings, Inc., Cowles Publishing Company; SECTION PlaintiffSECTION s Motion to Take Judicial Review (Dkt. 16) is irrelevant to the determination on the motion for preliminary injunctive relief. The motion and SECTION DefendantSECTION s objection to said motion will be taken up in the normal course of this litigation. The parties shall submit a joint litigation plan for the Courts consideration to allow for discovery and a full evidentiary hearing on the request for permanent injunctive relief.. Signed by Judge Edward J. Lodge. (caused to be mailed to non Registered Participants at the addresses listed on the Notice of Electronic Filing (NEF) by (dks) 20 NOTICE OF APPEAL as to 19 Order, by Bar Bar Inc., Cowles Publishing Company, Idaho Statesman Publishing, LLC, Idahoans for Openness in Government, Inc., Lee Enterprises, Incorporated, Pioneer Newspapers, Inc., TPC Holdings, Inc., The Associated Press, The Idaho Press Club, Inc.. Filing fee $ 455, receipt number (Notice sent to Court Reporter &9th Cir) (Brown, Charles) 21 USCA Case Number for 20 Notice of Appeal, filed by Idahoans for Openness in Government, Inc., Idaho Statesman Publishing, LLC, The Idaho Press Club, Inc., Pioneer Newspapers, Inc., The Associated Press, Bar Bar Inc., Lee Enterprises, Incorporated, TPC Holdings, Inc., Cowles Publishing Company. (dks) (Entered 22 ORDER of USCA as to 20 Notice of Appeal, filed by Idahoans for Openness in Government, Inc., Idaho Statesman Publishing, LLC, The Idaho Press Club, Inc., Pioneer Newspapers, Inc., The Associated Press, Bar Bar Inc., Lee Enterprises, Incorporated, TPC Holdings, Inc., Cowles Publishing Company ; On Wednesday June 6, 2012, the parties simultaneously (1) shall file opening briefs and any request for relief by 2 p.m. Pacific Time (PT); and (2) may file optional responses by 8 p.m. PT. The Court has read all district court filings so the parties are encouraged to file abbreviated briefs, focused upon the correctness of the district court's June 5, 2012 order. Oral argument is set for Thursday June 7, 2012 at 9 30 a.m. PT at the Richard H. Chambers Courthouse, 125 S. Grand Avenue, Pasadena, CA 91105. Counsel may appear in person in Pasadena, CA or may appear via video conference. A video conference link will be available at the U.S. District Court, 550 W. Fort Street, Boise, Idaho 83724. The Clerk's Office for the Ninth Circuit will be in contact with the parties regarding room locations. (dks) 23 OPINION of USCA as to 20 Notice of Appeal, filed by Idahoans for Openness in Government, Inc., Idaho Statesman Publishing, LLC, The Idaho Press Club, Inc., Pioneer Newspapers, Inc., The Associated Press, Bar Bar Inc., Lee Enterprises, Incorporated, TPC Holdings, Inc., Cowles Publishing Company (dks) (Entered 24 PLEASE DISREGARD-WRONG IMAGE PLACED ON DOCKET. CLERK TO REDOCKET WITH CORRECT IMAGE.MANDATE of USCA as to 20 Notice of Appeal, filed by Idahoans for Openness in Government, Inc., Idaho Statesman Publishing, LLC, The Idaho Press Club, Inc., Pioneer Newspapers, Inc., The Associated Press, Bar Bar Inc., Lee Enterprises, Incorporated, TPC Holdings, Inc., Case 1 Document <docnum> Filed <datefiled> Page 6 of 6 Cowles Publishing Company (dks) Modified on to edit text (dks). (Entered 25 MANDATE of USCA as to 20 Notice of Appeal, filed by Idahoans for Openness in Government, Inc., Idaho Statesman Publishing, LLC, The Idaho Press Club, Inc., Pioneer Newspapers, Inc., The Associated Press, Bar Bar Inc., Lee Enterprises, Incorporated, TPC Holdings, Inc., Cowles Publishing Company (dks) (Entered 26 ORDER of USCA amending 23 Opinion as to 20 Notice of Appeal, filed by Idahoans for Openness in Government, Inc., Idaho Statesman Publishing, LLC, The Idaho Press Club, Inc., Pioneer Newspapers, Inc., The Associated Press, Bar Bar Inc., Lee Enterprises, Incorporated, TPC Holdings, Inc., Cowles Publishing Company (dks) (Entered 27 ORDER of USCA (en banc proceedings concluded) as to 20 Notice of Appeal, filed by Idahoans for Openness in Government, Inc., Idaho Statesman Publishing, LLC, The Idaho Press Club, Inc., Pioneer Newspapers, Inc., The Associated Press, Bar Bar Inc., Lee Enterprises, Incorporated, TPC Holdings, Inc., Cowles Publishing Company (dks) (Entered 28 ORDER re 23 Opinion &25 USCA Mandate, vacating 19 Order; granting 2 MOTION for Preliminary Injunction filed by Idahoans for Openness in Government, Inc., Idaho Statesman Publishing, LLC, The Idaho Press Club, Inc., Pioneer Newspapers, Inc., The Associated Press, Bar Bar Inc., Lee Enterprises, Incorporated, TPC Holdings, Inc., Cowles Publishing Company. The parties are directed to submit a joint litigation plan to the Court on or before June 22, 2012 in order for the Court to address the remaining issues in this case.. Signed by Judge Edward J. Lodge. (caused to be mailed to non Registered Participants at the addresses listed on the Notice of Electronic Filing (NEF) by (dks) 29 DOCKET ENTRY ORDER Joint litigation plan shall be due by Signed by Judge Edward J. Lodge. (caused to be mailed to non Registered Participants at the addresses listed on the Notice of Electronic Filing (NEF) by (dmc) 30 STIPULATION re 28 Order, Joint Stipulation Requesting Extension of Time to File Joint Litigation Plan Pending Settlement of Matter by Bar Bar Inc., Cowles Publishing Company, Idaho Statesman Publishing, LLC, Idahoans for Openness in Government, Inc., Lee Enterprises, Incorporated, Pioneer Newspapers, Inc., TPC Holdings, Inc., The Associated Press, The Idaho Press Club, Inc.. (Brown, Charles) 31 STIPULATION re 28 Order, Stipulation (in lieu of Joint Litigation Plan) by Bar Bar Inc., Cowles Publishing Company, Idaho Statesman Publishing, LLC, Idahoans for Openness in Government, Inc., Lee Enterprises, Incorporated, Pioneer Newspapers, Inc., TPC Holdings, Inc., The Associated Press, The Idaho Press Club, Inc.. (Brown, Charles) 32 PERMANENT INJUNCTION. The Idaho Department of Corrections, and responsible parties associated therewith, are hereby ordered to modify their procedures to allow the witnesses to the execution of a condemned inmate to observe the entire execution from the moment the inmate enters the execution chamberthrough, to and including, the time the inmate is declared dead. So Ordered and this case will be deemed closed. Signed by Judge Edward J. Lodge. (caused to be mailed to non Registered Participants at the addresses listed on the Notice of Electronic Filing (NEF) by (cjm) Summary: On May 22, 2012, several national and local news agencies filed a § 1983 lawsuit against the state of Idaho, alleging that the policy of the Idaho Department of Correction to prohibit public viewing of the preparatory phase of the execution process, during which the inmate is restrained and the IV is inserted, violates the First Amendment right to free speech and the Fourteenth Amendment right to due process. The District Court denied plaintiffs' motion for a preliminary injunction on June 5, 2012, but the Ninth Circuit reversed the denial, on June 8, in time for the injunction to apply to the scheduled execution of Richard Leavitt. On July 10, the District Court entered a permanent injunction ordering the Idaho Department of Corrections to modify their execution procedures to allow witnesses to the execution throughout the entire execution process.

On May 22, 2012, several national and local news agencies filed a § 1983 lawsuit against the state of Idaho, alleging that the policy of the Idaho Department of Correction to prohibit public viewing of the preparatory phase of the execution process, during which the inmate is restrained and the IV is inserted, violates the First Amendment right to free speech and the Fourteenth Amendment right to due process. The District Court denied plaintiffs' motion for a preliminary injunction on June 5, 2012, but the Ninth Circuit reversed the denial, on June 8, in time for the injunction to apply to the scheduled execution of Richard Leavitt. On July 10, the District Court entered a permanent injunction ordering the Idaho Department of Corrections to modify their execution procedures to allow witnesses to the execution throughout the entire execution process.

Using the provided source, generate a concise summary: SECTION CaSe 0 As Of 07 22 PM CDT 1 of 59 CLOSED,CV,PHV,PROTO U.S. District Court District of Minnesota (DMN) CIVIL DOCKET FOR CASE # 0 Peterson et al v. Seagate US LLC et al Assigned to Chief Judge Michael J. Davis Referred to Chief Mag. Judge Arthur J. Boylan Demand Cause 29 621 Job Discrimination (Age) SECTION PlaintiffSECTION James Peterson Date Filed Date Terminated Jury Demand SECTION PlaintiffSECTION Nature of Suit 442 Civil Rights Jobs Jurisdiction Federal Question represented by Andrea R Ostapowich Bertelson Law Offices, PA 333 Washington Ave N Ste 402 Mpls, MN 55401 Fax Email [email protected] LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED Beth E Bertelson Bertelson Law Offices, PA 333 Washington Ave N Ste 402 Mpls, MN 55401 Fax Email [email protected] LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED Daniel B Kohrman AARP Foundation Litigation 601 E St NW Rm A4-240 Washington, DC 20049 Fax Email [email protected] LEAD ATTORNEY PRO HAC VICE ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED Dorene R Sarnoski Dorene R. Sarnoski Law Office 333 Washington Ave N, Ste 402 Mpls, MN 55401 Fax Email [email protected] LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED Laurie A McCann AARP Foundation Litigation 601 E St NW Rm A4-160 Washington, DC 20049 Email [email protected] LEAD ATTORNEY PRO HAC VICE ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED CaSe 0 As Of 07 22 PM CDT 2 of 59 Thomas W Osborne AARP Foundation Litigation 601 E St NW Rm A4-141 Washington, DC 20049 Email [email protected] LEAD ATTORNEY PRO HAC VICE ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED SECTION PlaintiffSECTION David Olson represented by Andrea R Ostapowich (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED Beth E Bertelson (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED Daniel B Kohrman (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY PRO HAC VICE ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED Dorene R Sarnoski (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED Laurie A McCann (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY PRO HAC VICE ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED Thomas W Osborne (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY PRO HAC VICE ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED SECTION PlaintiffSECTION Paul Calcagno represented by Andrea R Ostapowich (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED Beth E Bertelson (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED Daniel B Kohrman (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY PRO HAC VICE ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED Dorene R Sarnoski (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY CaSe 0 As Of 07 22 PM CDT 3 of 59 ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED Laurie A McCann (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY PRO HAC VICE ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED Thomas W Osborne (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY PRO HAC VICE ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED SECTION PlaintiffSECTION Rebecca Chwialkowski represented by Andrea R Ostapowich (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED Beth E Bertelson (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED Daniel B Kohrman (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY PRO HAC VICE ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED Dorene R Sarnoski (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED Laurie A McCann (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY PRO HAC VICE ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED Thomas W Osborne (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY PRO HAC VICE ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED SECTION PlaintiffSECTION Gary Egbert represented by Andrea R Ostapowich (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED Beth E Bertelson (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED Daniel B Kohrman (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY PRO HAC VICE ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED CaSe 0 As Of 07 22 PM CDT 4 of 59 SECTION PlaintiffSECTION Narenda Garg SECTION PlaintiffSECTION Luana Goodnough Dorene R Sarnoski (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED Laurie A McCann (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY PRO HAC VICE ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED Thomas W Osborne (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY PRO HAC VICE ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED represented by Andrea R Ostapowich (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED Bet Summary: Plaintiffs filed an age discrimination action against Seagate US, LLC. Plaintiffs alleged that they were terminated under false pretenses. Upon termination, plaintiffs were forced to sign a release of liability, stating that they would not bring action against Seagate. The court declared that the Releases offered to those Plaintiffs terminated pursuant to the 2004 RIF ( reduction in force ) are invalid as a matter of law. The court declared that the releases signed by Plaintiffs pursuant to the 2004 SIRP ( special incentive retirement plan ) were valid, and the claims of those plaintiffs were dismissed. A private settlement was reached on November 15, 2011. The case was dismissed with prejudice on January 26, 2012.

Plaintiffs filed an age discrimination action against Seagate US, LLC. Plaintiffs alleged that they were terminated under false pretenses. Upon termination, plaintiffs were forced to sign a release of liability, stating that they would not bring action against Seagate. The court declared that the Releases offered to those Plaintiffs terminated pursuant to the 2004 RIF ( reduction in force ) are invalid as a matter of law. The court declared that the releases signed by Plaintiffs pursuant to the 2004 SIRP ( special incentive retirement plan ) were valid, and the claims of those plaintiffs were dismissed. A private settlement was reached on November 15, 2011. The case was dismissed with prejudice on January 26, 2012.

Using the provided source, generate a concise summary: SECTION SECTION Case SECTION 5 As of 04 42 PM EDT 1 of 5 CLOSED,USMJ Gates U.S. District Court EASTERN DISTRICT OF NORTH CAROLINA (Western Division) CIVIL DOCKET FOR CASE # 5 Equal Employment Opportunity Commission v. S.G.T. Cinelli's, Date Filed Inc. Date Terminated Assigned to District Judge Terrence W. Boyle Jury Demand Both Cause 42 2000e Job Discrimination (Employment) Nature of Suit 442 Civil Rights Jobs Jurisdiction Federal Question Movant Nelson G. Harris represented by Nelson G. Harris Harris &Hilton, P.A. P. O. Box 31404 Raleigh, NC 27622 Fax Email [email protected] LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED SECTION PlaintiffSECTION Equal Employment Opportunity Commission represented by Kerith Cohen Equal Employment Opportunity Commission 200 Granby Street Suite 739 Norfolk, VA 23510 Email [email protected] LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED V. SECTION DefendantSECTION S.G.T. Cinelli's, Inc. doing business as Cinelli's Restaurant SECTION DefendantSECTION Cinelli's Ristorante, Inc. represented by Nelson G. Harris (See above for address) TERMINATED LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED Reagan H. Weaver Capitol District Law Offices P. O. Box 25096 Raleigh, NC 27611 Fax Email [email protected] TERMINATED LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED represented by Cinelli's Ristorante, Inc. 315 Belles Landing Court Cary, NC 27519 PRO SE Reagan H. Weaver SECTION Case SECTION 5 As of 04 42 PM EDT 2 of 5 (See above for address) TERMINATED LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED SECTION DefendantSECTION S.G.T. Cinelli's, Inc. Date Filed # Docket Text 1 COMPLAINT (Service by Request for Waiver pursuant to Rule 4(d)) against S.G.T. Cinelli's, Inc., filed by Equal Employment Opportunity Commission. (Attachments # 1 Civil Cover Sheet)(Cohen, Kerith) (Entered 2 NOTICE by Equal Employment Opportunity Commission Proposed Summons (Cohen, Kerith) (Entered 3 Summons Issued as to S.G.T. Cinelli's, Inc.. (Deputy Clerk - BRB, ) (Entered 4 AMENDED COMPLAINT against Cinelli's Ristorante, Inc., S.G.T. Cinelli's, Inc., filed by Equal Employment Opportunity Commission. (Attachments # 1 summons# 2 summons)(Cohen, Kerith) (Entered 5 Summons Reissued as to Gianni Cinelli, President, S.G.T. Cinelli's, Inc.. (Deputy Clerk - BRB, ) (Entered 6 Summons Reissued as to Peter Cinelli, President, Cinelli's Ristorante, Inc.. (Deputy Clerk - BRB, ) (Entered 7 MOTION for Extension of Time to File Answer by Cinelli's Ristorante, Inc., S.G.T. Cinelli's, Inc.. (Weaver, Reagan) (Entered 8 MOTION for Extension of Time to File Answer Attachment of proposed Order by Cinelli's Ristorante, Inc., S.G.T. Cinelli's, Inc.. (Weaver, Reagan) (Entered 9 ORDER granting 7 Motion for Extension of Time to Answer re 1 Complaint Cinelli's Ristorante, Inc. answer due S.G.T. Cinelli's, Inc. answer due S.G.T. Cinelli's, Inc. answer due. Signed by Clerk of Court on (Deputy Clerk - BRB, ) (Entered 10 Joint MOTION to Stay for Mediation by Cinelli's Ristorante, Inc., S.G.T. Cinelli's, Inc., Equal Employment Opportunity Commission. (Weaver, Reagan) (Entered 11 MOTION to Stay Proposed Order for Joint Motion to Mediate by Cinelli's Ristorante, Inc., S.G.T. Cinelli's, Inc., Equal Employment Opportunity Commission. (Weaver, Reagan) (Entered NOTICE OF DEFICIENCY re 11 Motion to Stay, 10 Motion to Stay in future filings please refer to the Western Division on the case captions. (Deputy Clerk - LKF, ) (Entered ***Motions Submitted 10 Joint MOTION to Stay for Mediation (Deputy Clerk - BRB, ) (Entered 12 ORDER granting 10 Motion to Stay responsive pleadings, discovery, and motions for sixty (60) days to allow the parties to schedule and hold a Court-Hosted Settlement Conference.. Signed by Judge Terrence W. Boyle on (Deputy Clerk - BRB, ) (Entered 13 ORDER re 12 Order on Motion to Stay. Signed by Judge James Gates on IT IS ORDERED the (1) The court-hosted settlement confernce shall be no later than March 18, 2007 in the Terry Sanford Federal Building in Raleigh; (2) The persons specified in Local ADR Rule E.D.N.C. shall attend the conference in person unless excused by Order of the court; (3) On or before SECTION Case SECTION 5 As of 04 42 PM EDT 3 of 5 January 31, 2007, counsel for plaintiff and counsel for defendants shall confer, in person or by telephone, and determine three dates not later than March 18, 2007, upon which they are mutually available for the settlement conference; (4) The parties shall submit a letter to the undersigned provided the foregoing dates within one day after conferring with each other; and (5)The court shall set the date and time for the settlement conference after receiving counsel's letter. (Deputy Clerk - BRB, ) (Entered 14 ORDER. Conference shall be held on Tuesday, March 6, 2007 in the Terry Sanford Federal Building, 310 New Bern Avenue, Raleigh, North Carolina beginning at 10am. Counsel should contact Magistrate Judge's chambers the week of the conference for information on the specific location of the conference in the Federal Building.. Signed by Judge James Gates on (Deputy Clerk - BRB, ) (Entered 15 NOTICE of Hearing Settlement Conference set for 10 00 AM before USMJ James Gates. Location of conference in Terry Sanford Federal Building, 310 New Bern Avenue, Raleigh, North Carolina to be determined. (Deputy Clerk - BRB, ) (Entered 16 MOTION by Equal Employment Opportunity Commission. (Cohen, Kerith) (Entered NOTICE OF DEFICIENCY re 16 Motion for Miscellaneous Relief Counsel is once again reminded in future filings this is a Western Division case. All filing should reflect this Division. (Deputy Clerk - LKF, ) (Entered MOTIONS 16 MOTION REFERRED to Judge James Gates. (Deputy Clerk - BRB, ) (Entered 17 ORDER granting 16 Motion. Signed by Judge James Gates on (Deputy Clerk - BRB, ) (Entered 18 Minute Entry for proceedings held before Judge James Gates on 6 March 2007 A court-hosted settlement conference was held. Physically present were plaintiff's attorneys Tina Burnside, Kerith Cohen, and Lynn Fontana; complainants Meghan O'Connell and Brittany McLaurin Bumgarner (with her husband and father); defendants' attorney Reagan Weaver; and corporate representatives for defendants Peter Cinelli and Johnny Cinelli. No settlement was reached and an impasse was declared. The impasse is without prejudice to any party moving at a later date for the convening of another court-hosted settlement conference or the pursuit of other authorized alternative dispute proceedings. SECTION DefendantSECTION s are advised to review the court's order of 19 January 2007 DE #12 regarding the filing deadline for their responsive pleadings. Time 3.5 hours. (CHAM, MM) (Entered 19 ANSWER to Amended Complaint by S.G.T. Cinelli's, Inc..(Deputy Clerk - LKF, ) (Entered 20 ANSWER to Amended Complaint by Cinelli's Ristorante, Inc..(Weaver, Reagan) (Entered 21 MOTION to Withdraw as Attorney by Cinelli's Ristorante, Inc., S.G.T. Cinelli's, Inc.. (Attachments # 1 Exhibit Discharge signed by Peter Cinelli# 2 Text of Proposed Order Order Allowing Withdrawal as Attorney)(Weaver, Reagan) (Entered 22 CORPORATE DISCLOSURE STATEMENT filed pursuant to FRCP 7.1. (Weaver, Reagan) (Entered MOTIONS 21 MOTION to Withdraw as Attorney REFERRED to Judge James Gates. (Deputy Clerk - BRB, ) (Entered 23 REQUEST FOR DISCOVERY PLAN sent to all parties(Deputy Clerk - BRB, ) (Entered 24 ORDER granting 21 Motion to Withdraw as Attorney. Attorney Reagan H. Weaver terminated. Signed by Judge James Gates on (Deputy Clerk - BRB, ) (Entered SECTION Case SECTION 5 As of 04 42 PM EDT 4 of 5 25 REPORT of Rule 26(f) Planning Meeting by Equal Employment Opportunity Commission.(Cohen, Kerith) (Entered 26 SCHEDULING ORDER Reports from retained experts are due from SECTION PlaintiffSECTION on or before 1 November 2007 and from SECTION DefendantSECTION s on or before 1 December 2007. Discovery due by Motions due by Signed by Judge James Gates on (Deputy Clerk - BRB, ) (Entered 27 MOTION to Withdraw as Attorney by Nelson G. Harris. (Harris, Nelson) (Entered MOTIONS REFERRED 27 MOTION to Withdraw as Attorney Motions referred to James E. Gates. (Deputy Clerk - BRB, ) (Entered 28 ORDER granting 27 Motion to Withdraw as Attorney. Attorney Nelson G. Harris terminated. Signed by USMJ James E. Gates on (Deputy Clerk - BRB, ) (Entered 29 MOTION to Strike 20 Answer to Amended Complaint, MOTION for Default Judgment as to SECTION DefendantSECTION Cinelli's Ristorante, Inc. ( Responses due by by Equal Employment Opportunity Commission. (Cohen, Kerith) (Entered 30 Memorandum in Support re 29 MOTION to Strike 20 Answer to Amended Complaint MOTION for Default Judgment as to SECTION DefendantSECTION Cinelli's Ristorante, Inc. courtesy copies for Judge Boyle mailed today filed by Equal Employment Opportunity Commission. (Attachments # 1 Exhibit Declaration of Kerith Cohen, # 2 Exhibit Declaration of Meghan O'Connell, # 3 Exhibit Declaration of Brittany Bumgarner, # 4 slip opinion) (Cohen, Kerith) (Entered 31 MOTION to Compel S.G.T.'s Discovery Responses, MOTION for Extension of Time to Complete Discovery with courtesy copies mailed to Judge Boyle by Equal Employment Opportunity Commission. (Cohen, Kerith) (Entered 32 Memorandum in Support of Motion to Compel S.G.T.'s Discovery Responses and to Extend Discovery filed by Equal Employment Opportunity Commission. (Attachments # 1 Exhibit 1 - 8, # 2 Text of Proposed Order) (Cohen, Kerith) (Entered MOTIONS REFERRED 31 MOTION to Compel S.G.T.'s Discovery Responses MOTION for Extension of Time to Complete Discovery with courtesy copies mailed to Judge Boyle Motions referred to James E. Gates. (Deputy Clerk - BRB, ) (Entered Motions Submitted 29 MOTION to Strike 20 Answer to Amended Complaint MOTION for Default Judgment as to SECTION DefendantSECTION Cinelli's Ristorante, Inc. (Deputy Clerk - BRB, ) (Entered 33 ORDER granting 31 Motion to Compel; granting 31 Motion for Extension of Time to Complete Discovery. All discovery shall be commenced in time to be concluded by June 27, 2008; All potentially dispositive motions shall be filed by July 28, 2008; All other provisions in the Scheduling Order remain in effect. Signed by USMJ James E. Gates on (Deputy Clerk - BRB, ) (Entered 34 ORDER deferring ruling on 29 Motion to Strike ; deferring ruling on 29 Motion for Default Judgment. Signed by Judge Terrence W. Boyle on (Deputy Clerk - BRB, ) (Entered 35 MOTION for Default Judgment as to SECTION DefendantSECTION S.G.T. Cinelli's, Inc., MOTION for Sanctions by Equal Employment Opportunity Commission. (Cohen, Kerith) (Entered 36 Memorandum in Support of Motion for Default Judgment Against SECTION DefendantSECTION S.G.T. Cinelli's Inc. and for Sanctions filed by Equal Employment Opportunity Commission. (Attachments # 1 Exhibit Exhibits 1 - 6, # 2 Exhibit Exhibits 7 - 11, # 3 Exhibit unpublished opinions) (Cohen, Kerith) (Entered Motions Submitted 29 MOTION to Strike 20 Answer to Amended Complaint MOTION for Default Judgment as to SECTION DefendantSECTION Cinelli's Ristorante, Inc., 35 SECTION Case SECTION 5 As of 04 42 PM EDT 5 of 5 MOTION for Default Judgment as to SECTION DefendantSECTION S.G.T. Cinelli's, Inc. MOTION for Sanctions (Deputy Clerk - SJT) (Entered 37 ORDER granting 29 Motion to Strike ; granting 29 Motion for Default Judgment; granting 35 Motion for Default Judgment; granting 35 Motion for Sanctions. Signed by Judge Terrence W. Boyle on (Deputy Clerk - SJT) (Entered 38 NOTICE of Hearing Hearing on Damages. Motion Hearing set for @ 3 00 PM in Raleigh - Courtroom TBA before Judge Terrence W. Boyle. If court is still in trial, date and time for the this hearing is subject to change until a later date. (Deputy Clerk - SJT) (Entered 39 Minute Entry for proceedings held before Judge Terrence W. Boyle Motion Hearing held on re Damages. Kerith Cohen was present for the SECTION PlaintiffSECTION s and presented her case. The defendants nor any representation for them were present. (Court Reporter Sharon Kroeger.) (Talbert, S.) (Entered 40 ORDER re 38 Notice of Hearing on Damages. Signed by Judge Terrence W. Boyle on (Talbert, S.) (Entered 41 JUDGMENT in favor of Equal Employment Opportunity Commission against Cinelli's Ristorante, Inc., S.G.T. Cinelli's, Inc.Signed by Clerk of Court on (Talbert, S.) (Entered Summary: In August 2006, the EEOC brought this suit in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of North Carolina on behalf of two female employees of Cinelli's restaurant. The EEOC alleged that the company violated Title VII by subjecting two female employees to a sexually hostile work environment. In 2008, the court entered a default judgment because the defendant failed to respond. The employees were awarded approximately in back pay, compensatory damages, and punitive damages.

In August 2006, the EEOC brought this suit in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of North Carolina on behalf of two female employees of Cinelli's restaurant. The EEOC alleged that the company violated Title VII by subjecting two female employees to a sexually hostile work environment. In 2008, the court entered a default judgment because the defendant failed to respond. The employees were awarded approximately in back pay, compensatory damages, and punitive damages.

Using the provided source, generate a concise summary: SECTION SECTION Case SECTION 1 As of 11 42 AM EDT 1 of 6 CLOSED,TYPE-D U.S. District Court District of Columbia (Washington, DC) CIVIL DOCKET FOR CASE # 1 SIMMS v. DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA et al Assigned to Judge Emmet G. Sullivan Cause 28 1331 Federal Question Other Civil Rights SECTION PlaintiffSECTION Date Filed Date Terminated Jury Demand None Nature of Suit 440 Civil Rights Other Jurisdiction Federal Question FREDERICK SIMMS represented by Alec George Karakatsanis Civil Rights Corps 916 G Street, NW Suite 701 Washington, DC 20001 (202) Email [email protected] LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED Sandra Kay Levick PUBLIC DEFENDER SERVICE FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA 633 Indiana Avenue, NW Washington, DC 20004 (202) Fax (202) Email [email protected] LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED Tara Mikkilineni PUBLIC DEFENDER SERVICE FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA 633 Indiana Avenue, NW Washington, DC 20004 (202) Fax (202) Email [email protected] LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED V. SECTION DefendantSECTION DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA represented by Chad Wayne Copeland OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA 441 4th Street, NW Suite 630 South Washington, DC 20001 (202) Fax (202) Email [email protected] LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED Jacques P. Lerner OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY SECTION Case SECTION 1 As of 11 42 AM EDT 2 of 6 GENERAL FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA Civil Litigation Division 441 4th Street, NW One Judiciary Square- 6th Floor South Washington, DC 20001 (202) Fax (202) Email [email protected] LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED SECTION DefendantSECTION CATHY L. LANIER Chief of Police represented by Chad Wayne Copeland (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED Jacques P. Lerner (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED SECTION DefendantSECTION VINCENT C. GRAY Mayor represented by Chad Wayne Copeland (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED Jacques P. Lerner (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED Date Filed # Docket Text 1 COMPLAINT against DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA, VINCENT GRAY, CATHY LANIER ( Filing fee $350, receipt number filed by FREDERICK SIMMS. (Attachments # 1 Civil Cover Sheet)(jf, ) (Additional attachment(s) added on # 2 Exhibit A) (dr). (Entered SUMMONS (3) Issued as to DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA, VINCENT GRAY, CATHY LANIER, District of Columbia Attorney General, and the District of Columbia Mayor. (jf, ) (Entered 2 MOTION for Preliminary Injunction by FREDERICK SIMMS (jf, ) (Entered MINUTE ORDER; Telephone Conference is set for at 02 00 PM in Courtroom 24A before Judge Emmet G. Sullivan.. Signed by Judge Emmet G. Sullivan on (clv, ) (Entered 3 NOTICE of Appearance by Jacques P. Lerner on behalf of DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA, VINCENT GRAY (Lerner, Jacques) (Entered MINUTE ORDER. In light of the parties' agreement during the telephonic status conference held on the record on May 4, 2012, the parties are hereby directed to comply with the following briefing schedule for plaintiffs motion for preliminary injunction. The parties shall file a joint status report containing their positions on consolidation on the merits under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure as well as the likelihood of settlement, by no later than May 9, 2012. SECTION DefendantSECTION s opposition to the motion for preliminary injunction shall be filed by no later than May 16, 2012. SECTION PlaintiffSECTION s reply shall be filed by no later than May 23, 2012. A hearing on the motion will be held on June 6, 2012 at 2 00 PM in Courtroom 24A. The parties are further SECTION Case SECTION 1 As of 11 42 AM EDT 3 of 6 directed to deliver to the chambers of the Honorable Emmet G. Sullivan two copies of their pleadings and exhibits as well as binders containing one copy of the principal points and authorities relied upon by the parties (i.e., counsel should provide copies of principal cases, statutes, regulations, etc., but need not provide copies of cases relied upon merely for the standard of review or other well-established principles). Signed by Judge Emmet G. Sullivan on May 4, 2012. (Entered Minute Entry for proceedings held before Judge Emmet G. Sullivan Telephone Conference held on (Court Reporter Catalina Kerr) (tth) Modified on (clv, ). (Entered Set/Reset Deadlines/Hearings defendant's opposition to motion for preliminary injunction due by plaintiff's reply due by Status Report due by Preliminary Injunction Hearing set for 02 00 PM in Courtroom 24A before Judge Emmet G. Sullivan. (clv, ) (Entered 4 STATUS REPORT (Joint Status Report) by FREDERICK SIMMS. (Karakatsanis, Alec) (Entered 5 RETURN OF SERVICE/AFFIDAVIT of Summons and Complaint Executed as to the District of Columbia Attorney General. Date of Service Upon District of Columbia Attorney General Answer due for ALL D.C. DEFENDANTS by (Karakatsanis, Alec) (Entered 6 RETURN OF SERVICE/AFFIDAVIT of Summons and Complaint Executed on the Mayor of the District of Columbia. Date of Service Upon the Mayor for the District of Columbia on (Karakatsanis, Alec) (Entered 7 RETURN OF SERVICE/AFFIDAVIT of Summons and Complaint Executed. CATHY LANIER served on (Karakatsanis, Alec) (Entered NOTICE OF ERROR re 4 Status Report; emailed to [email protected], cc'd 6 associated attorneys -- The PDF file you docketed contained errors 1. Invalid attorney signature (jf, ) (Entered 8 NOTICE of Appearance by Jacques P. Lerner on behalf of CATHY LANIER (Lerner, Jacques) (Entered 9 Memorandum in opposition to re 2 MOTION for Preliminary Injunction filed by DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA, VINCENT GRAY, CATHY LANIER. (Attachments # 1 Exhibit)(Lerner, Jacques) (Entered MINUTE ORDER directing both parties to immediately comply with the minute order dated May 4, 2012 directing the parties to deliver certain pleadings and authorities to chambers. The plaintiff and the defendant shall comply with the Court's May 4, 2012 Minute Order as to the motion for preliminary injunction and the opposition by no later than 4pm on Friday, May 18, 2012. SO ORDERED.Signed by Judge Emmet G. Sullivan on May 17, 2012. (Entered Set/Reset Deadlines opposition due by 4 00 p.m. on (clv, ) (Entered 10 NOTICE Status of D.C. Office of Attorney General's Decision on Civil Forfeiture by DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA, VINCENT GRAY, CATHY LANIER (Lerner, Jacques) (Entered 11 Consent MOTION for Extension of Time to File Answer re 1 Complaint, by DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA, VINCENT GRAY, CATHY LANIER (Lerner, Jacques) (Entered MINUTE ORDER granting 11 consent motion for extension of time to respond to complaint. The defendants shall answer or otherwise respond to the complaint by no later than June 29, 2012. Signed by Judge Emmet G. Sullivan on May 23, 2012. (Entered 12 REPLY to opposition to motion re 2 MOTION for Preliminary Injunction filed by FREDERICK SIMMS. (Karakatsanis, Alec) (Entered SECTION Case SECTION 1 As of 11 42 AM EDT 4 of 6 MINUTE ORDER. The Court is currently presiding over a civil jury trial which is expected to last through June 6. Accordingly, the hearing scheduled for June 6, 2012 at 2 00 pm is moved to June 6, 2012 at 4 30 pm in Courtroom 24A. PLEASE NOTE THE TIME CHANGE. Signed by Judge Emmet G. Sullivan on June 1, 2012. (Entered Set/Reset Hearings Preliminary Injunction Hearing set for 04 30 PM in Courtroom 24A before Judge Emmet G. Sullivan. (clv, ) (Entered MINUTE ORDER. The Court, sua sponte, schedules a telephonic status hearing in this matter today, Monday, June 4, 2012, at 4 45 PM. Counsel are instructed to jointly call Courtroom 24A at 202 354 3171 at 4 45 PM. The Court regrets any inconvenience to the parties. Signed by Judge Emmet G. Sullivan on June 4, 2012. (Entered Minute Entry for proceedings held before Judge Emmet G. Sullivan Telephone Conference held on Status Conference set for 04 30 PM in Courtroom 24A before Judge Emmet G. Sullivan. (Court Reporter CATALINA KERR.) (clv, ) (Entered 13 NOTICE of Filing by DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA, VINCENT GRAY, CATHY LANIER (Attachments # 1 Exhibit Libel of Information)(Lerner, Jacques) (Entered Minute Entry for proceedings held before Judge Emmet G. Sullivan Status Conference held on Districts Supplemental Memorandum due by Preliminary Injunction Hearing set for 02 00 PM in Courtroom 24A before Judge Emmet G. Sullivan. (Court Reporter CATALINA KERR.) (clv, ) (Entered 14 Memorandum in opposition to re 2 MOTION for Preliminary Injunction filed by DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA, VINCENT GRAY, CATHY LANIER. (Attachments # 1 Exhibit Exhibit 1 - Criminal docket, # 2 Exhibit Exhibit 2 - Declaration of Leroy Clay, # 3 Exhibit Exhibit 3 - Supplemental Declaration of Lt. Derek Gray)(Lerner, Jacques). (Entered NOTICE OF ERROR re 14 Supplemental Memorandum; emailed to [email protected], cc'd 6 associated attorneys -- The PDF file you docketed contained errors 1. document not linked to correct event (jf, ) (Entered 15 RESPONSE re 14 Supplemental Memorandum, filed by FREDERICK SIMMS. (Karakatsanis, Alec) (Entered Minute Entry for proceedings held before Judge Emmet G. Sullivan Preliminary Injunction held on Order to be presented. (Court Reporter CATALINA KERFR.) (clv, ) (Entered MINUTE ORDER. During the motions hearing on Wednesday, June 13, 2012, the court invited the parties to submit supplemental filings regarding the following issues (1) whether a lienholder on an automobile must pay a bond as a claimant to start the forfeiture process, (2) the relevance of a Sup. Cr. Crim. R. Rule 41(g) motion to the civil forfeiture proceedings; (3) a lienholder's rights to an automobile if the owner stops paying the car note while the car is being held pending forfeiture, and (4) the public interest factor of the preliminary injunction inquiry. The parties shall file any supplemental pleadings, which shall not exceed 10 pages, by no later than June 22, 2012. Signed by Judge Emmet G. Sullivan on June 15, 2012. (Entered Set/Reset Deadlines Supplemental Memorandum due by (clv, ) (Entered 16 SUPPLEMENTAL MEMORANDUM to re 2 MOTION for Preliminary Injunction Pursuant to the Minute Order of June 15, 2012 filed by DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA, VINCENT GRAY, CATHY LANIER. (Lerner, Jacques) (Entered 17 SUPPLEMENTAL MEMORANDUM to 2 Motion for Preliminary Injunction filed by FREDERICK SIMMS. (Mikkilineni, Tara) Modified to add link on (znmw, ). (Entered SECTION Case SECTION 1 As of 11 42 AM EDT 5 of 6 18 MOTION to Dismiss, MOTION to Dismiss for Lack of Jurisdiction or in the Alternative, MOTION for Summary Judgment by DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA, VINCENT GRAY, CATHY LANIER (Attachments # 1 Exhibit Exhibits to Motion)(Lerner, Jacques) (Entered 19 NOTICE of Filing re 18 MOTION to Dismiss, MOTION to Dismiss for Lack of Jurisdiction or in the Alternative, MOTION for Summary Judgment by DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA, VINCENT GRAY, CATHY LANIER (Attachments # 1 Exhibit)(Lerner, Jacques) Modified on (jf, ). (Entered 20 ORDER granting 2 Motion for Preliminary Injunction. Signed by Judge Emmet G. Sullivan on July 6, 2012. (Entered 21 MEMORANDUM AND OPINION. Signed by Judge Emmet G. Sullivan on July 6, 2012. (Entered 22 Unopposed MOTION for Extension of Time to File Response/Reply SECTION DefendantSECTION s' Dismissal and Summary Judgment Motions by FREDERICK SIMMS (Karakatsanis, Alec) (Entered MINUTE ORDER granting 22 unopposed motion for extension of time to respond to SECTION DefendantSECTION s' dismissal and summary judgment motion. SECTION PlaintiffSECTION shall respond to the motion by no later than July 30, 2012; defendants shall reply by no later than August 10, 2012. Signed by Judge Emmet G. Sullivan on July 12, 2012. (Entered Set/Reset Deadlines Response to Dispositive Motions due by Reply to Dispositive Motions due by (clv, ) (Entered 23 Joint MOTION for Extension of Time to File Response/Reply to SECTION DefendantSECTION s' Motion to Dismiss by FREDERICK SIMMS (Karakatsanis, Alec) (Entered MINUTE ORDER granting 23 joint motion for enlargement of time. SECTION PlaintiffSECTION shall file his response to the motion to dismiss or, in the alternative, for summary judgment by no later than August 30, 2012, and defendants shall file their reply by no later than September 12, 2012. Signed by Judge Emmet G. Sullivan on July 25, 2012. (Entered Set/Reset Deadlines Response to Dispositive Motions due by Reply to Dispositive Motions due by (clv, ) (Entered 24 Joint MOTION for Extension of Time to File Response/Reply as to 18 MOTION to Dismiss MOTION to Dismiss for Lack of Jurisdiction or in the Alternative MOTION for Summary Judgment by DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA, VINCENT C. GRAY, CATHY LANIER, FREDERICK SIMMS (Mikkilineni, Tara) (Entered MINUTE ORDER granting 24 joint motion for an additional enlargement of time. SECTION PlaintiffSECTION shall respond to SECTION DefendantSECTION s' Motion to dismiss or, in the alternative for Summary Judgment, by no later than October 1, 2012. SECTION DefendantSECTION s shall file their reply by no later than October 10, 2012. Signed by Judge Emmet G. Sullivan on August 29, 2012. (Entered 25 Emergency MOTION to Substitute Rule 65(c) Security by FREDERICK SIMMS (Attachments # 1 Exhibit Receipt for cashier's check)(Mikkilineni, Tara) (Entered DEPOSIT of Funds on July 9, 2012 as required by Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 65 by FREDERICK SIMMS in the amount of $ Receipt Number (rdj) (Entered 26 ORDER granting 25 Motion to Substitute Rule 65(c) Security. Signed by Judge Emmet G. Sullivan on August 31, 2012. (Entered Set/Reset Deadlines Response to Dispositive Motions due by Reply to Dispositive Motions due by (clv, ) (Entered 27 NOTICE of Appearance by Chad Wayne Copeland on behalf of All SECTION DefendantSECTION s (Copeland, Chad) (Entered SECTION Case SECTION 1 As of 11 42 AM EDT 6 of 6 28 Joint MOTION for Extension of Time to File Response/Reply as to 18 MOTION to Dismiss MOTION to Dismiss for Lack of Jurisdiction or in the Alternative MOTION for Summary Judgment by FREDERICK SIMMS (Mikkilineni, Tara) (Entered MINUTE ORDER granting 28 joint motion for an additional enlargement of time. SECTION PlaintiffSECTION shall respond to SECTION DefendantSECTION s' Motion to dismiss or, in the alternative for Summary Judgment, by no later than November 1, 2012. SECTION DefendantSECTION s shall file their reply by no later than November 10, 2012. Signed by Judge Emmet G. Sullivan on October 1, 2012. (Entered Set/Reset Deadlines Response to Dispositive Motions due by Reply to Dispositive Motions due by (clv, (Entered 29 Joint MOTION for Release of Funds Rule 65(c) Security by FREDERICK SIMMS (Mikkilineni, Tara) (Entered MINUTE ORDER granting 29 joint motion for release of Rule 65(c) funds. The Clerk of the Court is directed to forthwith release Rule 65(c) security funds in the amount of $1000 to Julia L. Leighton. Signed by Judge Emmet G. Sullivan on October 17, 2012. (Entered 30 NOTICE of Settlement and Dismissal by All Parties (Karakatsanis, Alec) (Entered Summary: In 2012, U.S. District Court of D.C. found that the policy of seizing and retaining private vehicles pending civil forfeiture proceedings without providing a post-deprivation hearing was unconstitutional.

In 2012, U.S. District Court of D.C. found that the policy of seizing and retaining private vehicles pending civil forfeiture proceedings without providing a post-deprivation hearing was unconstitutional.

Using the provided source, generate a concise summary: SECTION SECTION Case SECTION 1 As of 10 34 AM EDT 1 of 4 CASREF, CLOSED U.S. District Court District of Maryland (Baltimore) CIVIL DOCKET FOR CASE # 1 U.S. EEOC v. Coca-Cola Enterprises, Inc. Assigned to Judge Benson Everett Legg Cause 28 451 Employment Discrimination SECTION PlaintiffSECTION U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission Date Filed Date Terminated Jury Demand Both Nature of Suit 442 Civil Rights Jobs Jurisdiction U.S. Government SECTION PlaintiffSECTION represented by Debra Michele Lawrence U S Equal Employment Opportunity Commission City Crescent Bldg 10 S Howard St Third Fl Baltimore, MD 21201 Fax Email [email protected] ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED Gerald S Kiel US Equal Employment Opportunity Commission City Crescent Bldg 10 S Howard St Third Fl Baltimore, MD 21201 Fax Email [email protected] ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED Gwendolyn Young Reams U S Equal Employment Opportunity Commission City Crescent Bldg 10 S Howard St Third Fl Baltimore, MD 21201 Fax Maria Luisa Morocco US Equal Employment Opportunity Commission City Crescent Bldg 10 S Howard St Third Fl Baltimore, MD 21201 Fax Email [email protected] ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED Maria Salacuse U S Equal Employment Opportunity Commission Baltimore Field Office 10 S Howard St Third Fl Baltimore, MD 21201 Fax Email [email protected] SECTION Case SECTION 1 As of 10 34 AM EDT 2 of 4 ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED V. SECTION DefendantSECTION Coca-Cola Enterprises, Inc. doing business as Mid-Atlantic Coca-Cola Intervenor Mark Mason Intervenor SECTION PlaintiffSECTION represented by James E McCollum, Jr McCollum and Associates LLC 7309 Baltimore Ave Ste 117 PO Box 1717 College Park, MD 20741 Fax Email [email protected] LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED Carla Mae Mathers James E McCollum Jr and Associates 7309 Baltimore Ave Ste 117 College Park, MD 20740 Fax Email [email protected] ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED Christopher Harper Steger Miller and Martin PLLC Volunteer Bldg 832 Georgia Ave Ste 1000 Chattanooga, TN Fax Email [email protected] ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED represented by Lawrence Roger Holzman Joseph Greenwald and Laake PA 6404 Ivy Ln Ste 400 Greenbelt, MD 20770 Fax Email [email protected] LEAD ATTORNEY Date Filed # Docket Text 1 COMPLAINT against Coca-Cola Enterprises, Inc., filed by U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission. (Attachments # 1 Civil Cover Sheet)(ljs, Deputy Clerk) (Entered JURY TRIAL DEMAND by U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission. (ljs, Deputy Clerk) (Entered 2 Summons Issued (20 days) as to U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission. (ljs, Deputy Clerk) (Entered 3 SUMMONS Returned Executed by U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission. Coca-Cola Enterprises, Inc. served on answer due (Morocco, Maria) (Entered 4 ANSWER to Complaint with Jury Demand by Coca-Cola Enterprises, Inc..(McCollum, James) (Entered SECTION Case SECTION 1 As of 10 34 AM EDT 3 of 4 5 SCHEDULING ORDER Status Report due by Signed by Judge Benson E Legg on (mcb, Deputy Clerk) (Entered 6 Report re Deposition hours (McCollum, James) (Entered 7 ORDER AUTHORIZING 15 deposition hours per side as therein set forth. Signed by Judge Benson E Legg on (mcb, Deputy Clerk) (Entered 8 ORDER REFERRING CASE to Magistrate Judge Paul W. Grimm for Settlement or other ADR Conference. Signed by Judge Benson E Legg on (mcb, Deputy Clerk) (Entered 9 MOTION to Appear Pro Hac Vice by Coca-Cola Enterprises, Inc.. (McCollum, James) (Filed in error - will submit paper copy - attorney notified). Modified on (mcb, Deputy Clerk). (Entered 10 ORDER SETTING date for a Settlement Conference. Signed by Judge Paul W. Grimm on (mcb, Deputy Clerk) (Entered 11 Joint MOTION to Stay Discovery by Coca-Cola Enterprises, Inc.. Responses due by (Attachments # 1 Text of Proposed Order)(McCollum, James) (Entered 12 MOTION for Christopher H. Steger to Appear Pro Hac Vice by Coca-Cola Enterprises, Inc.. (jnl, Deputy Clerk) (Entered 13 ORDER granting 12 Motion of defendant for Christopher H. Steger to Appear Pro Hac Vice (fee pd). Signed by Deputy Clerk on (jnl, Deputy Clerk) (Entered 14 NOTICE of Appearance by James E McCollum, Jr on behalf of Coca-Cola Enterprises, Inc. (McCollum, James) (Entered 15 NOTICE by Coca-Cola Enterprises, Inc. Certificate Regarding Discovery (McCollum, James) (FILED IN ERROR - DISCOVERY) Modified on (mcb, Deputy Clerk). (Entered 16 ORDER granting 11 Joint Motion to Stay Discovery as therein set forth. Signed by Judge Benson E Legg on (mcb, Deputy Clerk) (Entered 17 Joint MOTION for Protective Order by U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission. Responses due by (Attachments # Maria) (Entered 18 MOTION to Intervene by Mark Mason. Responses due by (Attachments # 1 Exhibit Proposed Complaint# 2 Text of Proposed Order)(Holzman, Lawrence) (Entered 19 STIPULATED PROTECTIVE ORDER. Signed by Judge Benson Everett Legg on (mcb, Deputy Clerk) (Entered Settlement Conference held on held before Judge Paul W. Grimm. (jnl, Deputy Clerk) (Entered Judge Paul W. Grimm no longer assigned to case. (jnl, Deputy Clerk) (Entered 20 SETTLEMENT ORDER DISMISSING case with each party to bear its own costs otherwise agreed without prejudice to the right of a party to move for good cause to reopen this action if settlement is not consummated. Signed by Judge Benson Everett Legg on (jnl, Deputy Clerk) (Entered 21 NOTICE of Settlement Consent Decree by Coca-Cola Enterprises, Inc. (McCollum, James) (Entered 22 Correspondence re Correspondence to Chief Judge Benson Everett Legg (Steger, Christopher) (Entered 23 NOTICE of Settlement Consent Decree Nunc Pro Tunc by Coca-Cola Enterprises, Inc. (Attachments # 1 Exhibit A)(Steger, Christopher) (Entered SECTION Case SECTION 1 As of 10 34 AM EDT 4 of 4 24 CONSENT DECREE and approval entered Nunc Pro Tunc as of May 23, 2005. Signed by Judge Benson Everett Legg on (mcb, Deputy Clerk) (Entered Summary: On September 30, 2004, the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission ( EEOC ), on behalf of an African American employee (plaintiff-intervenor), filed a lawsuit in the District Court of Maryland, under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and Title I of the Civil Rights Act of 1991, against Coca-Cola Enterprises, Inc. The EEOC sought injunctive relief, compensatory damages, punitive damages, attorneys' fees, and other forms of affirmative relief claiming that the defendant did not promote the plaintiff-intervenor because of his race, African American. The parties entered into a consent decree where the defendant, among other things, agreed to promote the plaintiff-intervenor to a higher-paying position as well as pay him

On September 30, 2004, the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission ( EEOC ), on behalf of an African American employee (plaintiff-intervenor), filed a lawsuit in the District Court of Maryland, under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and Title I of the Civil Rights Act of 1991, against Coca-Cola Enterprises, Inc. The EEOC sought injunctive relief, compensatory damages, punitive damages, attorneys' fees, and other forms of affirmative relief claiming that the defendant did not promote the plaintiff-intervenor because of his race, African American. The parties entered into a consent decree where the defendant, among other things, agreed to promote the plaintiff-intervenor to a higher-paying position as well as pay him

Using the provided source, generate a concise summary: SECTION SECTION Case SECTION 1 As of 02 25 PM EDT 1 of 5 U.S. District Court Eastern District of New York (Brooklyn) CIVIL DOCKET FOR CASE # 1 CLOSED Cerda v. Restaurant Associates, Inc. et al Assigned to Judge Dora Lizette Irizarry Referred to Magistrate-Judge Robert M. Levy Cause 42 2000e Job Discrimination (Employment) SECTION PlaintiffSECTION Date Filed Date Terminated Jury Demand None Nature of Suit 442 Civil Rights Jobs Jurisdiction Federal Question Gerard Cerda individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated represented by Eugene A. Gaer 317 Madison Avenue Suite 2310 New York, NY 10017 (212) Email [email protected] LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED Roger J. Bernstein Law Offices of Roger Bernstein, Esq. 233 Broadway Suite 2701 New York, NY 10279 Fax Email [email protected] LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED V. SECTION DefendantSECTION Restaurant Associates, Inc. represented by Jonathan P. Harmon McGuire Woods, LLP One James Center 901 East Cary Street Richmond, VA 23059 (804) Fax (804) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED Michael J. DiMattia McGuire Woods LLP 1345 Avenue of the Americas 7th Floor New York, NY Fax Email [email protected] LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED Neera Mahajan Shetty McGuire Woods, LLP Bank of America Tower 50 North Laura Street Suite 3300 Jacksonville, FL (904) SECTION Case SECTION 1 SECTION DefendantSECTION RA Tennis Corp. As of 02 25 PM EDT 2 of 5 Fax (904) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED Richard David Sutton McGuire Woods, LLP 1345 Avenue of the Americas 7th Floor New York, NY Fax ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED represented by Jonathan P. Harmon (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED Michael J. DiMattia (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED Neera Mahajan Shetty (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED Richard David Sutton (See above for address) ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED Date Filed # Docket Text 1 COMPLAINT against RA Tennis Corp., Restaurant Associates, Inc. filing fee $ 150, receipt number filed by Gerard Cerda. (Attachments # 1 Civil Cover Sheet)(Villanueva, William) (Entered Summons Issued as to RA Tennis Corp., Restaurant Associates, Inc. (Villanueva, William) (Entered 2 SCHEDULING ORDER An initial conference has been scheduled for December 9, 2004 at 2 30 pm, in Courtroom 619 at 225 Cadman Plaza East, Brooklyn, New York. All counsel must be present. SECTION PlaintiffSECTION's counsel is directed to confirm with defendant's counsel that all necessary participants are aware of this conference. SEE ATTACHED ORDER Signed by Judge Robert M. Levy on (Marino, Janine) (Entered Email Test - DO NOT REPLY - All documents have to be filed electronically. http //www.nyed.uscourts.gov (Vaughn, Terry) (Entered 3 ANSWER to Complaint by RA Tennis Corp., Restaurant Associates, Inc.(Lee, Tiffeny) (Entered 4 ADMINISTRATIVE ORDER You are required to file all original documents electronically. In the future, please ensure that all original documents in this action are filed electronically. Clearly marked hard copy-courtesy documents should be submitted to Chambers. Courtesy copies should also indicate that the original of the submitted document has already been electronically filed. Further Hard Copy filings may not be accepted. Registration forms are also attached. Michael J. DiMattia, Esq. is directed to advise McGuire Woods, LLP Co-Counsel of Mandatory ECF Compliance in the Eastern District of New York, and forward registration forms. (Lee, Tiffeny) (Entered SECTION Case SECTION 1 As of 02 25 PM EDT 3 of 5 5 Notice of MOTION for Leave to Appear Motion to Appear Pro Hac Vice by all defendants. (Sutton, Richard) (Entered 6 ORDER granting 5 Motion for Leave to Appear Pro Hac Vice as to Jonathan P. Harmon, Esq. and Neera Mahajan Shetty, Esq. Signed by JudgeNicholas G. Garaufis on c/em All counsel is further reminded of Administrative Order mandating that all filings in the Eastern District of New York are to be made electronically. Any and all counsel that has yet to register for CM/ECF is directed to do so immediately. (www.nyed.uscourts.gov) (Lee, Tiffeny) (Entered Minute Entry for proceedings held before Robert M. Levy Eugene Gaer, Roger Bernstein, plaintiff; Jonathan Harmon, defendants. Settlement discussions initiated. The following discovery shall be completed by 4/1/05 all document requests and interrogatories, and the deposition of the named plaintiff Gerard Cerda. The parties shall appear for a status conference on March 3, 2005 at 2 00 pm. A settlement conference with lawyers and principals will be held on April 28, 2005 from 10 00 to 12 00 to discuss resolution of the injunctive claims. Initial Conference Hearing held on (Levy, Robert) (Entered Case reassigned to Judge Dora Lizette Irizarry. Judge Nicholas G. Garaufis no longer assigned to the case. (Villanueva, William) (Entered Minute Entry for proceedings held before Robert M. Levy Eugene Gaer, plaintiff; Jonathan Harmon, Larry Jones, defendants. The settlement conference on will be held from 10-2. Principals shall attend, as discussed. The parties shall submit pre-conference statements to my chambers by The parties shall clearly designate as confidential any portions of their statements that are for chambers' eyes only.Status Conference held on (Levy, Robert) (Entered 7 SCHEDULING ORDER A telephone conference has been scheduled for May 12, 2005 at 11 30 a.m., before the Honorable Robert Levy, United States Magistrate Judge, at (718) All counsel must be available. SECTION PlaintiffSECTION's counsel is requested to initiate conference call and confirm with defendants'counsel that all necessary participants are aware of this conference. No request for an adjournment will be considered unless made at least forty-eight (48) hours before the scheduled conference. Ordered by Judge Robert M. Levy on (Marino, Janine) (Entered Minute Entry for proceedings held before Robert M. Levy Eugene Gaer, Roger Bernstein, plaintiff; Jonathan Harmon, Larry Jones, defendants. Discovery is progressing. The parties will appear for a mediation on June 27, 2005 at 3 00 pm. Confidential pre-mediation submissions shall be submitted by June 17, 2005. Clients with settlement authority shall be present at the conference and available by telephone.Status Conference held on (Levy, Robert) (Entered 8 STIPULATION - Protective Order between SECTION PlaintiffSECTION Gerard Cerda and SECTION DefendantSECTION Restaurant Associates, Inc. by Restaurant Associates, Inc.. (Sutton, Richard) (Entered ELECTRONIC ENDORSED ORDER re 8 Stipulation filed by Restaurant Associates, Inc., ----- This application for approval of a protective order which has been stipulated to by the parties is referred to Magistrate Judge Robert M. Levy as are all other discovery and non-dispositive matters. SO ORDEREDby Judge Dora Lizette Irizarry on (Irizarry, Dora) (Entered ORDER re Order, 8 Stipulation filed by Restaurant Associates, Inc. Following review of the proposed protective order, the order is hereby APPROVED. Ordered by Judge Robert M. Levy on (Levy, Robert) (Entered Minute Entry for proceedings held before Robert M. Levy All counsel present with clients. Settlement discussions held. Parties to reformulate proposals and return for continued settlement discussions at 12 00. Discovery schedule to be revised at that time, if the case does not settle.Settlement Conference held on (Levy, Robert) (Entered SECTION Case SECTION 1 As of 02 25 PM EDT 4 of 5 Minute Entry for proceedings held before Robert M. Levy All parties present with counsel. Detailed settlement discussions held. Some progress made. Next conference at 2 15 (settlement).Settlement Conference held on (Levy, Robert) (Entered 9 Minute Entry for proceedings held before Robert M. Levy Settlement Conference held on Extensive settlement discussions held. Next Conf. set for at 2 15 (Permaul, Jenny) (Entered 10 ORDER endorsed on letter dated from Jonathan Harmon to Mag. Robert M. Levy reqesting a continuance of the settlement conference that is scheduled for Application granted. The Conference is adjourned to at 4 00 p.m. Ordered by Judge Robert M. Levy on (Black, Amanda) (Entered 11 ENDORSED ORDER granting application to adjourn settlement conference. Conference now scheduled for @ 10 00 a.m. Ordered by Judge Robert M. Levy on (Lee, Tiffeny) (Entered 12 ENDORSED ORDER conference adjourned to @ 4 00 p.m. Ordered by Judge Robert M. Levy, on (Endorsed on letter dated from Jonathan P. Harmon to USMJ Levy) (Barrett, C.) (Entered ORDER. As the parties report that they have reached agreement in principle on a settlement, the January 27, 2006 settlement conference is cancelled. The parties shall contact chambers by 2/3/06 to schedule a conference to resolve any remaining questions. The conference may be by telephone, if the parties prefer. Ordered by Judge Robert M. Levy on (Levy, Robert) (Entered 13 Letter dated from Eugene A. Gaer to USMJ Levy, requesting that the conference scheduled for @ 4 00 p.m., be cancelled subject to rescheduling at a mutually convenient date. (Barrett, C.) (Entered 14 ORDER endorsed on letter dated from Jonathan Harmon to Mag. Robert M. Levy requesting a conference to discuss a preliminary settlement of this class action. APPLICATION GRANTED. Conference scheduled for at 3 00 p.m. Ordered by Judge Robert M. Levy on (Black, Amanda) (Entered Minute Entry for proceedings held before Robert M. Levy Eugene Gaer; Jonathan Harmon, Lawrence Jones. Parties agree to settlement, submit proposed order and notice of settlement and hearing, execute consent to jurisdiction of magistrate judge. Hearing on Proposed Class Action Settlement scheduled for May 31, 2006 at 11 00 a.m. in Courtroom 11 B South.Settlement Conference held on (Levy, Robert) (Entered 15 SCHEDULING ORDER The Hearing on Approval of Proposed Class Action Settlement will be held on May 31, 2006 at 11 00 a.m. in Courtroom 11 B South before Judge Robert M. Levy. Attached is the Order with Respect to Preliminary Approval of Class Action Settlement, and Notice and Hearing on Proposed Class Action Settlement and (1) the Consent to Magistrate Judge Trial. Ordered by Judge Robert M. Levy on (Attachments # 1 Consent to Magistrate Judge Trial)(Levy, Robert) Additional attachment(s) added on (Vaughn, Terry). (Entered 16 NOTICE of filing settlement agreement and consent to proceed before magistrate judge SCHEDULING ORDER The Hearing on Approval of Proposed Class Action Settlement will be held on May 31, 2006 at 11 00 a.m. in Courtroom 11 B South before Judge Robert M. Levy. Attached is the Order with Respect to Preliminary Approval of Class Action Settlement, and Notice and Hearing on Proposed Class Action Settlement and (1) the Consent to Magistrate Judge Trial. Ordered by Judge Robert M. Levy on (Attachments # 1 Consent to Proceed before Magistrate Judge)(Vaughn, Terry) (Entered 17 Letter As to Changing Final Hearing Date to post-July 11, 2006 by Gerard Cerda. (Attachments # Roger) (Entered SECTION Case SECTION 1 As of 02 25 PM EDT 5 of 5 ORDER re 17 Letter filed by Gerard Cerda. The application is GRANTED. The final hearing date is adjourned from May 31, 2006 to July 26, 2006 at 11 15 a.m. Counsel shall conform the order and class notice accordingly Ordered by Judge Robert M. Levy on (Levy, Robert) (Entered 18 Letter dated from Roger J. Bernstein to USMJ Levy, advising that the parties are available for a final hearing on a date after C.) (Entered 19 MOTION for Settlement Approval - Memorandum of Law in Support of Final Approval of Class Action Settlement by Gerard Cerda. (Attachments # 1 Affidavit Gaer Declaration as to Settlement Claims Administration 7 20 06# 2 Affidavit Jones Decl. as to Mailing of Notices)(Bernstein, Roger) (Entered 20 Minute Entry for proceedings held before Robert M. Levy Settlement Conference held on Counsel for the parties present. Hearing held. Settlement approved. Case can be closed. (Permaul, Jenny) (Entered 21 FINAL APPROVAL ORDER of Proposed Settlement of this action. The Clerk is directed to close the file in this matter and to mark this case terminated. The Court shall retain jurisdiction for 90 days hereafter to address any questions concerning settlment fund administration and distribution. Ordered by Judge Robert M. Levy on (Permaul, Jenny) (Entered Summary: On August 9, 2004, the plaintiff filed this class action lawsuit in the Eastern District of New York on behalf of all Hispanic and/or non-white refreshment concession personnel who were hired, employed or offered employment by the defendants, Restaurant Associates and RA Tennis Corp. The plaintiff alleged that the defendants engaged in unlawful employment discrimination on the basis of national origin and race respecting the assignment of positions and locations to food vendors employed at the U.S. Open Tennis Tournament. Specifically, they alleged that the defendants were deliberately and overwhelmingly assigning beer wagons to non-Hispanic white people over other demographics. The parties soon reached a settlement which was approved by U.S. District Court Judge Robert M. Levy, and Restaurant Associates agreed to pay damages. This case is closed.

On August 9, 2004, the plaintiff filed this class action lawsuit in the Eastern District of New York on behalf of all Hispanic and/or non-white refreshment concession personnel who were hired, employed or offered employment by the defendants, Restaurant Associates and RA Tennis Corp. The plaintiff alleged that the defendants engaged in unlawful employment discrimination on the basis of national origin and race respecting the assignment of positions and locations to food vendors employed at the U.S. Open Tennis Tournament. Specifically, they alleged that the defendants were deliberately and overwhelmingly assigning beer wagons to non-Hispanic white people over other demographics. The parties soon reached a settlement which was approved by U.S. District Court Judge Robert M. Levy, and Restaurant Associates agreed to pay damages. This case is closed.

Using the provided source, generate a concise summary: SECTION SECTION Case SECTION 1 As of 01 01 PM PST 1 of 5 U.S. District Court Eastern District of California - Live System (Fresno) CIVIL DOCKET FOR CASE # 1 CLOSED Loomis, et al v. Visalia Unified Dist, et al Assigned to Senior Judge Oliver W. Wanger Referred to Magistrate Judge Lawrence J. O'Neill, MJ Demand $0 Cause 42 1983 Civil Rights Act SECTION PlaintiffSECTION Date Filed Date Terminated Jury Demand Both Nature of Suit 440 Civil Rights Other Jurisdiction Federal Question George S Loomis represented by George S Loomis 1228 E Elizabeth Fresno, CA 93728 PRO SE SECTION PlaintiffSECTION Gay-Straight Alliance Network represented by John Elliott Eichorst Howard Rice Nemerovski Canady Falk and Rabkin Three Embarcadero Center Suite 700 San Francisco, CA 94111 Email [email protected] LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED V. SECTION DefendantSECTION Visalia Unified School District SECTION DefendantSECTION Linda Gonzales Superintendant SECTION DefendantSECTION Bob Cesena SECTION DefendantSECTION Gig Stevens represented by John Laurence Rozier Nelson, Rozier and Bettencourt 3924 West Caldwell Avenue Suite A Visalia, CA 93277 (559) Fax (559) Email [email protected] LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED represented by John Laurence Rozier (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED represented by John Laurence Rozier (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED represented by John Laurence Rozier (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY SECTION Case SECTION 1 As of 01 01 PM PST 2 of 5 ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED SECTION DefendantSECTION Juan - Garcia represented by John Laurence Rozier (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED SECTION DefendantSECTION Sarah Karam TERMINATED SECTION DefendantSECTION Carlyn Lambert Superintendent represented by John Laurence Rozier (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED Date Filed # Docket Text 1 COMPLAINT for Damages, injunctive and declaratory relief; jury demand, fee status paid, receipt # assigned to Judge Oliver W. Wanger referred to Magistrate Judge Lawrence J. O'Neill (rcf) Modified on (Entered 2 RECEIPT of for plaintiff George S Loomis by George Loomis Receipt # 191198 (rcf) Modified on (Entered 3 ORDER setting mandatory scheduling conference for 8 45 before Judge Oliver W. Wanger (rcf) (Entered 4 STANDING ORDER by Judge Oliver W. Wanger (cc all counsel) (rcf) (Entered 5 NOTICE from G Lucas scheduling conference continued to 8 45 3/1/01 before Wanger (old) (Entered 6 REQUEST by plaintiff George S Loomis for summons and aid in service of summons (mm) (Entered 7 LETTER to court from counsel for pla George S Loomis requesting the scheduling conference be moved to 8 45 3/9/01 before Judge Wanger (hm) (Entered 8 FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT 1-1 by plaintiff George S Loomis terminating defendant Sarah Karam and adding pltf Gay-Straight Alliance Network and dft Carlyn Lambert; jury demand (jv) (Entered 9 RETURN OF SERVICE executed upon defendant Visalia Unified Dist, defendant Carlyn Lambert, defendant Bob Cesena, defendant Gig Stevens, defendant Juan - Garcia on (sr) (Entered 10 MOTION to dismiss for failure to state a claim upon which relief can be granted, for more definite statement, to strike portions of the complaint, for summary judgment or for summary adjudication of issues by dfts Visalia Unified, Lambert, Gonzales, Cesena, Stevens, Garcia motion TO BE HEARD by Judge Oliver W. Wanger; Motion Hearing Set For at 10 00 (sr) (Entered 11 MEMORANDUM OF POINTS AND AUTHORITIES by dfts Visalia Unified, Linda Gonzales, Bob Cesena, Gig Stevens, Juan Garcia, Carlyn Lambert in support of motion to dismiss 10-1, motion for more definite statement 10-2, motion to strike 10-3, motion for summary judgment of for summary adjudication of issues 10-4 (sr) (Entered SECTION Case SECTION 1 As of 01 01 PM PST 3 of 5 12 DECLARATION of John Rozier in support of motion to dismiss 10-1, motion for more definite statement 10-2, motion to strike 10-3, motion for summary judgment or summary adjudication 10-4 (sr) (Entered 13 STATEMENT by dfts Visalia Unified Dist, Linda Gonzales, Bob Cesena, Gig Stevens, Juan - Garcia, Carlyn Lambert of undisputed facts in support of motion to dismiss 10-1, motion for more definite statement 10-2, motion to strike 10-3, motion for summary judugment or summary adjuciation 10-4 (sr) (Entered 14 REQUEST for Judicial notice by dfts Visalia Unified Dist, Linda Gonzales, Bob Cesena, Gig Stevens, Juan - Garcia, Carlyn Lambert (sr) (Entered 15 TABLE OF CONTENTS by dfts Visalia Unified Dist, Linda Gonzales, Bob Cesena, Gig Stevens, Juan - Garcia, Carlyn Lambert RE motion to dismiss for failure to state a claim upon which relief can be granted 10-1, RE motion for more definite statement 10-2, RE motion to strike portions of the complaint 10-3, RE motion for summary judgment or for summary adjudication of issues by dfts Visalia Unified, Lambert, Gonzales, Cesena, Stevens, Garcia 10-4 (sr) (Entered 16 EXHIBIT B by dfts Visalia Unified Dist, Linda Gonzales, Bob Cesena, Gig Stevens, Juan - Garcia regarding 10-1, 10-2, 10-3, 10-4 (rab) (Entered 17 JOINT SCHEDULING REPORT by pltfs, dfts (jv) (Entered 18 OPPOSITION by pltf's George S Loomis, Gay-Straight to motion to dismiss for failure to state a claim upon which relief can be granted 10-1, to motion for more definite statement 10-2, to motion to strike portions of the complaint 10-3, to motion for summary judgment or for summary adjudication of issues by dfts Visalia Unified, Lambert, Gonzales, Cesena, Stevens, Garcia 10-4 (rcf) (Entered 19 SEPARATE STATEMENT by pltf's George S Loomis, Gay-Straight of facts in opposition to 10-1, 10-2, 10-3, 10-4 (rcf) (Entered 20 DECLARATION of Edward B Mullen III in support of pltf's opposition 18-1 (rcf) (Entered LODGED (Proposed) Order denying motion to dismiss for failure to state a claim; for a more definite statement; to strike portions of complaint; for summary jgmt and/or summary adjudication of issues by pltf's George S Loomis, Gay-Straight (rcf) (Entered 21 PROOF OF SERVICE by pltf's George S Loomis, Gay-Straight of 0-0, 20-1, 19-1, 18-1 (rcf) (Entered 22 PROOF OF SERVICE by plaintiff Gay-Straight of 21-1, 0-0, 20-1, 18-1 (rcf) (Entered 23 NOTICE by plaintiff George S Loomis of hearing scheduling conference continued to 10 00 before Judge Wanger ctrm 2 ( cc all counsel) (rab) (Entered 24 REPLY BRIEF IN SUPPORT OF MOTIONS by dfts Visalia Unified Dist, Linda Gonzales, Bob Cesena, Gig Stevens, Juan Garcia, Carlyn Lambert to to dismiss for failure to state a claim upon which relief can be granted 10-1, to motion for more definite 10-2, to motion to strike portions of the complaint 10-3, to motion for summary judgment or for summary adjudication of issues by dfts Visalia Unified, Lambert, Gonzales, Cesena, Stevens, Garcia 10-4 (rab) (Entered 25 MINUTES of before Judge Oliver W. Wanger motion to dismiss for failure to state a claim upon which relief can be granted 10-1, motion for more definite statement 10-2, motion to strike portions of the complaint 10-3, motion for summary judgment or for summary adjudication of issues by dfts Visalia Unified, Lambert, Gonzales, Cesena, Stevens, Garcia 10-4 SUBMITTED until further briefing, opening brief reply brief C/R S Crump (sr) (Entered SECTION Case SECTION 1 As of 01 01 PM PST 4 of 5 26 SCHEDULING CONFERENCE ORDER by Judge Oliver W. Wanger ORDERING pretrial conference set for 11 00 before Judge Wanger, Ctrm 2; trial set for 9 00 before Judge Wanger, Ctrm 2; settlement conference set for 10 30 before Judge O'Neill, Ctrm 6; non-dispositive motion filing ddl set for and dispositive motion filing ddl set for discovery cut-off ddl set for (cc all counsel) (jh) (Entered 27 MEMORANDUM, Opinion and Order by Judge Wanger request for judicial notice by dfts 14-1 GRANTED, motion to dismiss for failure to state a claim upon which relief can be granted 10-1 DENIED, motion for more definite statement 10-2 DENIED, motion to strike portions of the complaint 10-3 DENIED, motion for summary judgment or for summary adjudication of issues by dfts Visalia Unified, Lambert, Gonzales, Cesena, Stevens, Garcia 10-4 DENIED (cc all counsel) (old) (Entered 28 OBJECTIONS by pla George S Loomis to dfts' request for clarification (hm) (Entered 29 MEMORANDUM, Opinion and Order by Judge Wanger; the memorandum, opinion and order filed on 27 is corrected to read pursuant to California Govt Code section 818, public entities such as dft, VISALIA UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT, are immune from exposure to punitive damages from State law claims. Plas at oral argument have expressed their intent not to seek punitive damages from the VISALIA UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT. Dfts' motion to dismiss pla GEORGE LOOMIS' prayer for punitive damages against dft VISALIA UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT is GRANTED (cc all counsel) (hm) (Entered 30 ANSWER to first amended complaint by dfts Visalia Unified Dist, Linda Gonzales, Bob Cesena, Gig Stevens, Juan - Garcia (mm) (Entered 31 COURT NOTICE from Irma Lira, Deputy Clerk settlement conference CONTINUED to 10 00 a.m. before Judge O'Neill, Ctrm 6 (cc all counsel) (jh) (Entered LODGED stipulation and order by plaintiffs George S Loomis, and Gay-Straight (old) (Entered LODGED stipulation and order extending trial date and case management deadlines by plaintiffs George S Loomis, and Gay-Straight (old) (Entered 32 STIPULATION AND ORDER by Judge Oliver W. Wanger pretrial conference set for 11 00 trial set for 9 00 non-dispositive pre-trial motion filing ddl set for hearing on non-dispositive pre-trial motions set for at 9 00 before Magistrate Judge O'Neill; discovery ddl set for Discovery cut-off ddk last date to file dispositive motions hearing on dispositive motions set for 3/4/02 at 10 00; expert witness discosure ddl supplemental expert witness disclosure ddl (cc all counsel) (old) (Entered 33 NOTICE by plaintiff's Gay-Straight, George S Loomis 4-1 of entry of order (wh) (Entered 34 STIPULATION AND ORDER by Judge Oliver W. Wanger pretrial conference set for 11 00 am trial set for 9 00 am designation of expert witnesses set for supplemental expert disclosure set for motion filing ddl set for last date to file non-dispositive motions hearing on non-dispostive motions at 9 00 am before Magistrate Judge Lawrence J. O'Neill; hearing on dispositive motions at 10 00 am; discovery ddl set for (cc all counsel) (tel) (Entered 35 MINUTES of before Magistrate Judge Dennis L. Beck settlement conference held on ; no settlement; counsel to notify court if parties have settled (old) (Entered 36 NOTICE by plaintiff George S Loomis of hearing settlement conference set for 10 30 before Magistrate Beck (wh) (Entered SECTION Case SECTION 1 As of 01 01 PM PST 5 of 5 37 NOTICE by Counsel for defendants Visalia Unified Dist, Linda Gonzales, Bob Cesena, Gig Stevens and Juan - Garcia of change of Firm Name and Address to Nelson, Rozier &Bettencourt 3924 W Caldwell, Suite A Visalia, CA 93277 (tel) (Entered 38 STANDING ORDER by Magistrate Judge Lawrence J. O'Neill informing the parties on the procedure to follow in pursuing this action (tel) (Entered LODGED stipulation and order extending and/or vacating trial date and case management deadlines by plaintiff George S Loomis, plaintiff Gay-Straight (sr) (Entered 39 MINUTES of before Magistrate Judge Dennis L. Beck settlement conference held on no settlement reached, although discussions will continue (sr) (Entered 40 STIPULATION AND ORDER Judge Oliver W. Wanger ORDERING that trial dates and case management ddls be VACATED (cc all counsel) (sr) (Entered 41 MAIL returned stipulation and order extending and/or vacating trial date and case mgmt ddls 40-1 addressed to plaintiff George S Loomis at 1228 E Elizabeth, Fresno CA 93728; (order will not be re-served as pltf is no longer pro per; pltf is represented by counsel who was served with copy of order) (jv) (Entered LODGED Stipulation and order re trial date and case management deadlines by pltf George S Loomis, Gay-Straight (rcf) (Entered 42 STIPULATION AND ORDER by Judge Oliver W. Wanger Stipulation to continue trial date and case managment deadlines 0-0 GRANTED case mgmt ddl set for to present new trial date and appropriate case mgmt ddls to the Court should not settle by (cc all counsel) (rcf) (Entered 43 MAIL returned 42-2 addressed to plaintiff George S Loomis (moved left no address, unable to forward) (sr) (Entered 44 ORDER by Judge Oliver W. Wanger ORDERING Consent Decree and Order; Stipulation of dismissal GRANTED; pltf's and dft's consent to and the Court hereby ORDERS that this action is dismissed w/prejudice provided however, that the Court shall retain jurisdiction over this action for the period specified to ensure compliance w/all provisions of this Consent Order CASE DISMISSED with prejudice (cc all counsel) (rcf) (Entered 45 MAIL returned 44-2 addressed to plaintiff George S Loomis envelope states RETURN TO SENDER-MOVED LEFT NO ADDRESS (rcf) Modified on (Entered 2 RETURNED Receipt from Federal Records Center; 2 volumes (jv) (Entered Summary: This federal lawsuit was filed in 2000 in the Eastern District of California; in it, a former high school student and the Gay-Straight Alliance Network sued his school district for failure to take effective measures to remedy continuing harassment that he faced based on his sexual orientation. The case settled for a consent decree entered August 15, 2002, which required the defendants to implement a mandatory staff training program, revise its policies, select compliance coordinators, develop systems for reporting harassment and discrimination, allow students to form a gay-straight alliance, and create a community advisory group. The decree implementation period was 6 months.

This federal lawsuit was filed in 2000 in the Eastern District of California; in it, a former high school student and the Gay-Straight Alliance Network sued his school district for failure to take effective measures to remedy continuing harassment that he faced based on his sexual orientation. The case settled for a consent decree entered August 15, 2002, which required the defendants to implement a mandatory staff training program, revise its policies, select compliance coordinators, develop systems for reporting harassment and discrimination, allow students to form a gay-straight alliance, and create a community advisory group. The decree implementation period was 6 months.

Using the provided source, generate a concise summary: SECTION Settlement Agreement between the United States and National Passenger Railroad Corporation - Amtrak SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA AND NATIONAL RAILROAD PASSENGER CORPORATION (“AMTRAK”) Press Release I. INTRODUCTION 1. The United States of America (“United States”) intends to bring an action against the National Railroad Passenger Corporation (“Amtrak”) to enforce Title II of the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990, as amended (“ADA”), 42 U.S.C. § and its implementing regulation, 49 C.F.R. Part 37, United States v. Amtrak (the “Civil Action”). The United States alleges Amtrak violated Title II of the ADA by failing to make the existing for which it is responsible in its intercity rail transportation system readily accessible to and usable by individuals with disabilities, including individuals who use wheelchairs, per the U.S. Department of Transportation Standards for Accessible Transportation Facilities (“DOT Standards”), 49 C.F.R. §§ 37.9 and 37.43, and 49 C.F.R. Part 37, Appendix A. The United States further alleges this has harmed passengers with disabilities using or seeking to use Amtrak’s services. Amtrak denies these allegations and asserts that it is, and has been, committed to complying with the ADA and to accommodating individuals with disabilities, but it enters into this Settlement Agreement (“Agreement”) voluntarily in order to continue in good faith to devote significant resources to improve transportation services to passengers with disabilities as it has for several years, rather than in litigation. 2. The United States and Amtrak (collectively, the “Parties”) agree that it is in the Parties’ best interests, and the public’s interest, to resolve this matter on mutually agreeable terms. The Parties acknowledge and agree that the fact that Amtrak has entered into this Agreement should not be considered an admission or evidence of guilt https //www.ada.gov/amtrak_sa.html 1/106 Settlement Agreement between the United States and National Passenger Railroad Corporation - Amtrak or liability. The Parties therefore agree and stipulate to enter into this Agreement to resolve the United States’ complaint against Amtrak. II. AMTRAK 3. Amtrak operates at approximately 500 stations across 46 states and the District of Columbia, and is a corporation organized under the laws of the District of Columbia. 49 U.S.C. § The parties agree that Amtrak is deemed a “public entity” for purposes of the ADA, 42 U.S.C. § and 49 C.F.R. § 37.3, that is subject to Title II of the ADA and its implementing regulations, 28 C.F.R. Part 35 and 49 C.F.R. Parts 37 and 38. III. TERMS 4. Amtrak will comply with Title II of the ADA, 42 U.S.C. §§ and its implementing regulation, 49 C.F.R. Parts 37, and will modify its policies, practices, and procedures, to the extent set forth herein, when such modifications are necessary to bring its intercity rail transportation service into compliance with Title II of the ADA. 5. Amtrak will take steps, where expressly required by this Agreement, to inform its agents, vendors, contractors, and service providers that each must comply with Title II of the ADA and its accessible transportation requirements. 6. Amtrak will not retaliate against or coerce in any way any person who has tried or tries to exercise his or her rights under this Agreement or Title II of the ADA. 7. When Amtrak constructs any new station, Amtrak shall construct it to be readily accessible to and usable by individuals with disabilities, including individuals who use wheelchairs, unless Amtrak can demonstrate that it is structurally impracticable, as required by 42 U.S.C. § and 49 C.F.R. § 37.41. 8. Consistent with the terms set forth in this Agreement, Amtrak shall make existing stations for which it is responsible readily accessible to and usable by individuals with https //www.ada.gov/amtrak_sa.html 2/106 Settlement Agreement between the United States and National Passenger Railroad Corporation - Amtra Summary: On December 2, 2020, the U.S. Department of Justice filed a complaint against the National Railroad Passenger Corporation (“Amtrak”) for allegedly violating the Americans with Disabilities Act, 42 U.S.C. §§ by failing to make its intercity rail stations accessible to individuals with disabilities by July 26, 2020, as required by the Act. The case was never properly docketed or assigned to a judge, however, because the government announced its settlement with Amtrak on the same day. The settlement agreement required Amtrak to design at least 135 accessible stations, complete construction at 90 stations, and be in the process of constructing at least 45 stations within 10 years of the settlement date. The agreement also required Amtrak to train staff on ADA compliance, establish a monitor-approved process for managing ADA complaints, and create a settlement fund to compensate individuals who were harmed by Amtrak’s most inaccessible stations. The settlement was monitored by the Federal Railroad Administration and the Department of Justice.

On December 2, 2020, the U.S. Department of Justice filed a complaint against the National Railroad Passenger Corporation (“Amtrak”) for allegedly violating the Americans with Disabilities Act, 42 U.S.C. §§ by failing to make its intercity rail stations accessible to individuals with disabilities by July 26, 2020, as required by the Act. The case was never properly docketed or assigned to a judge, however, because the government announced its settlement with Amtrak on the same day. The settlement agreement required Amtrak to design at least 135 accessible stations, complete construction at 90 stations, and be in the process of constructing at least 45 stations within 10 years of the settlement date. The agreement also required Amtrak to train staff on ADA compliance, establish a monitor-approved process for managing ADA complaints, and create a settlement fund to compensate individuals who were harmed by Amtrak’s most inaccessible stations. The settlement was monitored by the Federal Railroad Administration and the Department of Justice.

Using the provided source, generate a concise summary: SECTION Case 1 Document 1 Filed Page 1 of 7 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA STUDENTS FOR FAIR ADMISSIONS, ) INC., ) 2200 Wilson Blvd, Suite 102-13 ) Arlington, VA 22201, ) ) SECTION PlaintiffSECTION, ) ) v. ) ) U.S. DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION, ) 400 Maryland Avenue, SW, ) Washington, D.C. 20202, ) ) SECTION DefendantSECTION. ) ____________________________________) Civil Action No. COMPLAINT SECTION PlaintiffSECTION Students for Fair Admissions, Inc. brings this action against SECTION DefendantSECTION U.S. Department of Education to compel compliance with the Freedom of Information Act, 5 U.S.C. § 552. SECTION PlaintiffSECTION alleges as follows JURISDICTION AND VENUE 1. The Court has jurisdiction over this action pursuant to 5 U.S.C. § and 28 U.S.C. § 1331. 2. Venue is proper in this district pursuant to 5 U.S.C. § PARTIES 3. SECTION PlaintiffSECTION Students for Fair Admissions, Inc. (“SFFA”) is an Internal Revenue Code Section voluntary membership organization formed for the purpose of defending human and civil rights secured by law, including the right of individuals to equal protection under the law, through litigation and any other lawful means. Case 1 Document 1 Filed Page 2 of 7 4. SECTION DefendantSECTION U.S. Department of Education (“the Department”) is an agency of the United States government. The Department has possession, custody, and control of records to which SFFA seeks access. The Department is headquartered at 400 Maryland Avenue, SW, Washington, D.C. 20202. STATEMENT OF FACTS 5. On January 11, 2016, SFFA submitted a request under the Freedom of Information Act (“FOIA”) to the Department, seeking the following All documents concerning the investigation of Princeton University in Case Number which is referenced in the September 9, 2015 letter from Timothy C.J. Blanchard to Christopher L. Eisgruber. See http 6. By letter dated January 13, 2016, the Department acknowledged receiving SFFA’s request on January 11, 2016 and advised that it had assigned SFFA’s request as FOIA Request No. 7. On February 22, 2016, six weeks after SFFA submitted its FOIA request, SFFA’s counsel emailed the Department’s FOIA Office to determine when the Department would produce the documents responsive to SFFA’s FOIA request. 8. The next day, Kim Jones, the Department’s FOIA Manager, replied that the Department was “conducting a search for responsive records,” but did “not have a specific completion time available.” 9. On April 14, 2016, more than three months after SFFA submitted its FOIA request, SFFA’s counsel again emailed the Department’s FOIA Office to determine when the Department would produce the documents responsive to SFFA’s FOIA request. - 2 - Case 1 Document 1 Filed Page 3 of 7 10. Later that day, Ms. Jones sent SFFA’s counsel the same email from two months earlier, informing SFFA that the Department was “conducting a search for responsive records,” but did “not have a specific completion time available.” 11. On April 18, 2016, John Carroll, an officer of the U.S. Department of Education, New York Office for Civil Rights, had a telephone conversation with Edward Blum, the President of SFFA, and SFFA’s counsel about SFFA’s FOIA request. Later that afternoon, Mr. Carroll sent Mr. Blum an email purporting to summarize the conversation “ Y ou confirmed that you are making this request on behalf of Students for Fair Admission. You also confirmed that you agree to the redaction of personally identifiable information. You also confirmed that you would like the documents to be provided in digital format on a CD. Finally, you confirmed that you would like the entire case file. After receiving our response, if you disagree with any of our redactions you can file an appeal in writing, within 35 days of your receipt of our response. ” 12. A few months later, SFFA received a letter from the U.S. Department of Education, New York Office for Civil Rights dated June 10, 2016. In that letter, the agency said that it was “currently processing the documents that are responsive to your request,” but needed “additional time … due to the volume of documents requested,” which it estimated to “exceed 1,500 pages.” 13. On July 18, 2016, more than seven months after SFFA submitted its FOIA request, SFFA’s counsel emailed Mr. Carroll to determine when the Department would produce the documents responsive to SFFA’s FOIA request. 14. The following day, Mr. Carroll responded to SFFA via email. Mr. Carroll “apologize d for the delay,” but said the request was “being processed as expeditiously as possible but due to the size and complexity of the request, it would require additional processing time.” Mr. Carroll declined to provide an estimated time for completion. - 3 - Case 1 Document 1 Filed Page 4 of 7 15. On August 31, 2016, more than seven months after SFFA submitted its FOIA request, SFFA’s counsel again emailed Mr. Carroll to determine when the Department would produce the documents responsive to SFFA’s FOIA request. SFFA’s counsel received no reply. 16. On September 7, 2016, almost eight months after SFFA submitted its FOIA request, SFFA’s counsel again emailed Mr. Carroll to determine when the Department would produce the documents responsive to SFFA’s FOIA request. 17. The following day Mr. Carroll responded to SFFA via email. Similar to his response in July, Mr. Carroll “apologize d for the delay in responding to your messages,” but could not “provide … a completion date at this time.” Mr. Carroll stated that “due to the large number of documents, the complexity of the case, and the large number of FOIA requests we are currently processing in addition to our investigations, the documents are still being reviewed and redacted.” 18. As of October 27, 2016, more than nine months after SFFA submitted its FOIA request, the Department’s website still identifies SFFA’s FOIA request status as “conducting search.” See U.S. Department of Education, Status of All FY2016 FOIA Requests and All Open Requests for Prior Years as of http 19. As of October 27, 2016, the Department has failed to “gather and review the documents” SFFA has requested and “determine and communicate the scope of the documents it intends to produce and withhold, and the reasons for withholding any documents.” Citizens for Responsibility & Ethics in Washington (“CREW”) v. Federal Election Commission, 711 F.3d 180, 188 (D.C. Cir. 2013). -4- Case 1 Document 1 Filed Page 5 of 7 20. As of October 27, 2016, SFFA has not received any documents from the Department in response to its January 11, 2016, FOIA request. COUNT I (Violation of FOIA, 5 U.S.C. § 552) 21. SFFA realleges paragraphs 1 through 20 as if fully stated herein. 22. FOIA provides that, subject to certain statutory exemptions, federal agencies shall “upon any request for records which reasonably describes such records... make the records promptly available to any person.” 5 U.S.C. § 23. Under FOIA, a federal agency must make and communicate a “determination” whether to comply with a FOIA request—and communicate “the reasons therefor”—within 20 working days of receiving the request, or within 30 working days in “unusual circumstances.” 5 U.S.C. §§ 24. To make such a determination, the agency must “(i) gather and review the documents; (ii) determine and communicate the scope of the documents it intends to produce and withhold, and the reason for withholding any documents; and (iii) inform the requester that it can appeal whatever portion of the ‘determination’ is adverse.” CREW, 711 F.3d at 188. 25. If the agency does not issue a “determination” within the required time period, “the requester may bring suit directly in federal district court without exhausting administrative appeal remedies.” CREW, 711 F.3d at 182. 26. FOIA gives federal courts jurisdiction “to enjoin the agency from withholding agency records and to order the production of any agency records improperly withheld from the complainant.” 5 U.S.C. § 27. The Department of Education is a federal agency subject to FOIA’s requirements. See 5 U.S.C. § -5- Case 1 Document 1 Filed Page 6 of 7 28. The Department has made no “determination” as to SFFA’s FOIA request, made no reasonable effort to search for responsive documents, and produced no documents responsive to SFFA’s FOIA request. 29. The Department’s failure to make a “determination” as to SFFA’s FOIA request within the required time period violates FOIA and the Department’s corresponding regulations and relieves SFFA of any obligation to exhaust administrative appeal remedies before filing its FOIA lawsuit. See 5 U.S.C. § 34 C.F.R. § 5.1 et seq. 30. The Department’s failure to make a reasonable effort to search for records in electronic form or a format responsive to SFFA’s FOIA request violates FOIA and the Department’s corresponding regulations. See 5 U.S.C. § 34 C.F.R. § 5.1 et seq. 31. The Department’s failure to make promptly available the records sought by SFFA violates FOIA and the Department’s corresponding regulations. See 5 U.S.C. § 34 C.F.R. § 5.1 et seq. WHEREFORE, SFFA respectfully requests that the Court (1) order the Department to conduct searches for any and all records responsive to SFFA’s FOIA request and demonstrate that it employed search methods reasonably likely to lead to the discovery of records responsive to SFFA’s FOIA request; (2) order the Department to produce, by a date certain, any and all non-exempt records to SFFA’s FOIA request and a Vaughn index of any responsive records withheld under claim of exemption; (3) enjoin the Department from continuing to withhold any and all non-exempt records responsive to SFFA’s FOIA request; - 6 - Case 1 Document 1 Filed Page 7 of 7 (4) grant SFFA an award of attorneys’ fees and other litigation costs reasonably incurred in this action pursuant to 5 U.S.C. § and (5) grant SFFA such other relief as the Court deems just and proper. Dated October 27, 2016 Respectfully submitted, By /s/ J. Michael Connolly J. Michael Connolly D.C. Bar No. 995815 CONSOVOY MCCARTHY PARK PLLC 3033 Wilson Boulevard, Suite 700 Arlington, VA 22201 Tel (703) Email [email protected] Counsel for SECTION PlaintiffSECTION Students for Fair Admissions, Inc. - 7 - Summary: The plaintiff, Students for Fair Admissions (SFFA) sued the U.S. Department of Education to compel compliance with its FOIA request related to its investigation of Princeton University. The defendant notified Princeton of the request and the lawsuit, and Princeton then filed a lawsuit against SFFA to enjoin the disclosure of the materials requested under FOIA. The present case was consolidated into that suit, and the parties jointly stipulated to this case's dismissal.

The plaintiff, Students for Fair Admissions (SFFA) sued the U.S. Department of Education to compel compliance with its FOIA request related to its investigation of Princeton University. The defendant notified Princeton of the request and the lawsuit, and Princeton then filed a lawsuit against SFFA to enjoin the disclosure of the materials requested under FOIA. The present case was consolidated into that suit, and the parties jointly stipulated to this case's dismissal.

Using the provided source, generate a concise summary: SECTION CAND-ECF https ADRMOP, CLOSED, E-Filing, MEDTERM U.S. District Court California Northern District (San Jose) CIVIL DOCKET FOR CASE # 5 Equal Employment Opportunity Commission v. Robert G. Aptekar, MD., Inc. Assigned to Hon. Ronald M. Whyte Referred to Magistrate Judge Patricia V. Trumbull Cause 28 1331 Fed. Question Employment Discrimination Date Filed Date Terminated Jury Demand SECTION PlaintiffSECTION Nature of Suit 442 Civil Rights Jobs Jurisdiction U.S. Government SECTION PlaintiffSECTION SECTION PlaintiffSECTION Equal Employment Opportunity Commission represented by Sanya P. Hill Maxion U.S. EEOC 350 The Embarcadero Suite 500 San Francisco, CA (415) Fax Email [email protected] LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED Jonathan T. Peck U.S. EEOC 350 Embarcadero Street Suite 500 San Francisco, CA Fax Email [email protected] ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED William Robert Tamayo U.S. EEOC 350 Embarcadero Street Suite 500 San Francisco, CA Fax Email [email protected] ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED V. 1 of 4 5 37 PM CAND-ECF https SECTION DefendantSECTION Robert G. Aptekar, MD., Inc. doing business as Arthritis and Orthopedic Medical Clinic represented by Brooke Desiree Andrich Heller Ehrman LLP 333 Bush Street San Francisco, CA 94104 (415) Fax (415) Email [email protected] LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED Brian Koji Nagatani Heller Ehrman LLP 275 Middlefield Road Menlo Park, CA 94025 (650) Fax (650) Email [email protected] ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED Steven R. Feldstein Heller, Ehrman, White & McAuliffe LLP 275 Middlefield Road Menlo Park, CA 94025 (650) Fax Email [email protected] ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED Date Filed # Docket Text 1 COMPLAINT against Robert G. Aptekar, MD., Inc.. Filed by Equal Employment Opportunity Commission. (bw, COURT STAFF) (Filed on Additional attachment(s) added on (bw, COURT STAFF). (Entered 2 ADR SCHEDULING ORDER Case Management Statement due by Case Management Conference set for 02 00 PM. (Attachments # 1 Standing Order)(bw, COURT STAFF) (Filed on Additional attachment(s) added on (bw, COURT STAFF). (Entered CASE DESIGNATED for Electronic Filing. (bw, COURT STAFF) (Filed on (Entered Summons Issued as to Robert G. Aptekar, MD., Inc.. (bw, COURT STAFF) (Filed on (Entered 3 PROOF OF SERVICE by Equal Employment Opportunity Commission of Complaint and other documents (Hill Maxion, Sanya) (Filed on Text modified on to conform to document post by counsel (bw, COURT STAFF). (Entered 2 of 4 5 37 PM CAND-ECF https 4 ANSWER to Complaint byRobert G. Aptekar, MD., Inc.. (Andrich, Brooke) (Filed on (Entered 5 Declination to Proceed Before a U.S. Magistrate Judge by Robert G. Aptekar, MD., Inc. and Request for Reassignment to a United States District Judge. (Andrich, Brooke) (Filed on (Entered 6 CLERK'S NOTICE of impending reassignment Case Management Conference set for 10 30 AM before Honorable Ronald M. Whyte. Case Management Statement due by (cm, COURT STAFF) (Filed on (Entered 7 ORDER REASSIGNING CASE. Case reassigned to District Judge Ronald M. Whyte for all further proceedings and Judge Patricia V. Trumbull remains as the Referral Judge for this case. Signed by the Executive Committee on (srm, COURT STAFF) (Filed on (Entered 8 STIPULATION Joint Stipulation and Proposed Order Continuing Case Management Conference by Robert G. Aptekar, MD., Inc.. (Andrich, Brooke) (Filed on (Entered 9 STIPULATION AND ORDER Re 8 Continuing Case Management Conference Case Management Conference set for 10 30 AM. Signed by Judge Ronald M. Whyte on (jg, COURT STAFF) (Filed on (Entered 10 ADR Certification (ADR L.R. 3-5b) of discussion of ADR options (Hill Maxion, Sanya) (Filed on (Entered 11 STIPULATION and Proposed Order selecting Mediation by Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (Hill Maxion, Sanya) (Filed on (Entered 12 STIPULATION AND ORDER, Case referred to mediation..Signed by Judge Ronald M. Whyte on (cm, COURT STAFF) (Filed on (Entered 13 JOINT CASE MANAGEMENT STATEMENT AND PROPOSED ORDER filed by Equal Employment Opportunity Commission. (Hill Maxion, Sanya) (Filed on (Entered 14 Minute Entry Initial Case Management Conference held on before Ronald M. Whyte (Date Filed (Court Reporter Not Reported.) (jg, COURT STAFF) (Date Filed (Entered 15 ADR Clerk's Notice Appointing Jessica M. Notini as Mediator. (cmf, COURT STAFF) (Filed on (Entered 16 Proposed Order Re Scheduling by Robert G. Aptekar, MD., Inc.. (Nagatani, Brian) (Filed on (Entered Set/Reset Hearings Mediation Hearing set for at 09 30 AM at Heller Ehrman LLP in Menlo Park. (cmf, COURT STAFF) (Filed on (Entered 3 of 4 5 37 PM CAND-ECF https 17 CASE MANAGEMENT SCHEDULING ORDER Re 16 Discovery cutoff by Jury Trial set for 01 30 PM in Courtroom 6, 4th Floor, San Jose. Motion Hearing set for 09 00 AM in Courtroom 6, 4th Floor, San Jose. Pretrial Conference set for 02 00 PM in Courtroom 6, 4th Floor, San Jose. Signed by Judge Ronald M. Whyte on (jg, COURT STAFF) (Filed on (Entered 18 CERTIFICATION OF MEDIATION Session dated by Jessica Notini; Mediation session held CAse fully settled; Mediation process is complete. (cmf, COURT STAFF) (Filed on (Entered 19 Proposed Order of Consent Decree by Equal Employment Opportunity Commission. (Hill Maxion, Sanya) (Filed on (Entered 20 CONSENT DECREE 19, ***Civil Case Terminated. Signed by Judge Ronald M. Whyte on (jg, COURT STAFF) (Filed on (Entered PACER Login Description Billable Pages PACER Service Center Transaction Receipt 15 37 04 wu0079 Client Code eeoc Docket Report Search Criteria 5 3 Cost 0.24 4 of 4 5 37 PM Summary: On August 9, 2006, the San Francisco office of the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission filed a lawsuit under Title VII against Robert G. Aptekar, MD, Inc. and the Arthritis and Orthopedic Medical Clinic in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California. The EEOC alleged that the defendants had violated the rights of the complainant by subjecting her to racial harassment, subjecting her to a hostile work environment, and by retaliating against her when she filed a complaint with the EEOC. On July 16, 2007, the parties entered a consent decree set to last 18 months, which the District Court (Judge Ronald M. Whyte) approved on August 20, 2007. Among other things, the defendants agreed to pay the complainant in unspecified damages.

On August 9, 2006, the San Francisco office of the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission filed a lawsuit under Title VII against Robert G. Aptekar, MD, Inc. and the Arthritis and Orthopedic Medical Clinic in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California. The EEOC alleged that the defendants had violated the rights of the complainant by subjecting her to racial harassment, subjecting her to a hostile work environment, and by retaliating against her when she filed a complaint with the EEOC. On July 16, 2007, the parties entered a consent decree set to last 18 months, which the District Court (Judge Ronald M. Whyte) approved on August 20, 2007. Among other things, the defendants agreed to pay the complainant in unspecified damages.

Using the provided source, generate a concise summary: SECTION CLASS,CLOSED,PROTO U.S. District Court Eastern District of Louisiana (New Orleans) CIVIL DOCKET FOR CASE # 2 Berry et al v. Pastorek et al Assigned to Judge Jay C. Zainey Referred to Magistrate Judge Karen Wells Roby Cause 20 1412 Disabilities Education Act SECTION PlaintiffSECTION Date Filed Date Terminated Jury Demand None Nature of Suit 440 Civil Rights Other Jurisdiction Federal Question Cassandra Berry Next friend of P.B. represented by Adriana Teresa Luciano Southern Poverty Law Center (New Orleans) 201 St. Charles Ave Suite 2000 New Orleans, LA 70170 Email [email protected] ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED Alejandro H. Cruz Patterson, Belknap, Webb & Tyler, LLP (New York) 1133 Avenue of the Americas New York, NY Email [email protected] PRO HAC VICE ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED Brenda L. Shum Lawyers Committee for Civil Rights 1401 New York Avenue N.W. Suite 400 Washington, DC 20005 Email [email protected] TERMINATED PRO HAC VICE Davida Finger Loyola Law School Clinic 7214 St. Charles Ave. New Orleans, LA 70118 Email [email protected] ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED Eden B. Heilman ACLU of Virginia 701 E. Franklin Street Suite 1412 Richmond, VA 23219 Email [email protected] TERMINATED Elizabeth L. Callahan Patterson, Belknap, Webb & Tyler, LLP (New York) 1133 Avenue of the Americas New York, NY TERMINATED PRO HAC VICE Eugene M. Gelernter Patterson, Belknap, Webb & Tyler, LLP (New York) 1133 Avenue of the Americas New York, NY Email [email protected] James E. Comstock-Galagan James Comstock-Galagan Law Office 6314 Carlson Drive New Orleans, LA 70122 Email ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED Jasmine Ariel Bolton Southern Poverty Law Center (New Orleans) 1055 St. Charles Ave. Suite 505 New Orleans, LA 70130 Email [email protected] PRO HAC VICE ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED Jennifer M. Coco 3319 St. Claude Ave New Orleans, LA 70117 Email [email protected] TERMINATED Jerri Katzerman Southern Poverty Law Center (Montgomery) 400 Washington Avenue Montgomery, AL 36104 Email [email protected] TERMINATED PRO HAC VICE John K. DiPaolo Lawyers Committee for Civil Rights 1401 New York Avenue N.W. Suite 400 Washington, DC 20005 TERMINATED PRO HAC VICE Jon M. Greenbaum Lawyers Committee for Civil Rights 1401 New York Avenue N.W. Suite 400 Washington, DC 20005 Email [email protected] ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED Katharine Murphy Schwartzmann American Civil Liberties Union Foundation (New Orleans) 1340 Poydras St. Suite 2160 P. O. Box 56157 New Orleans, LA 70156 Email [email protected] TERMINATED Krista Dawn Adler Patterson, Belknap, Webb & Tyler, LLP (New York) 1133 Avenue of the Americas New York, NY Email [email protected] TERMINATED Matthew D. Sykes Lawyers Committee for Civil Rights 1401 New York Avenue N.W. Suite 400 Washington, DC 20005 Email [email protected] TERMINATED Muhammad U. Faridi Patterson, Belknap, Webb & Tyler, LLP (New York) 1133 Avenue of the Americas New York, NY Email [email protected] PRO HAC VICE ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED Neilinder Singh Ranu Southern Poverty Law Center 201 St. Charles Ave Suite 2000 New Orleans, LA 70170 Email [email protected] ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED Poopak Banky Patterson, Belknap, Webb & Tyler, LLP (New York) 1133 Avenue of the Americas New York, NY PRO HAC VICE Rosanne E. Felicello Patterson, Belknap, Webb & Tyler, LLP (New York) 1133 Avenue of the Americas New York, NY TERMINATED PRO HAC VICE Sheila A. Bedi Southern Poverty Law Center (Jackson) 921 North President St. Jackson, MS 39202 (601) Email [email protected] TERMINATED Sophia Mire Hill Southern Poverty Law Center (New Orleans) 201 St. Charles Ave Suite 2000 New Orleans, LA 70170 Email [email protected] ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED Sumit Mallick Lawyers Committee for Civil Rights 1401 New York Avenue N.W. Suite 400 Washington, DC 20005 Email [email protected] TERMINATED Thomas P. Kurland Patterson, Belknap, Webb & Tyler, LLP (New York) 1133 Avenue of the Americas New York, NY Em Summary: On October 26, 2010, a group of students with disabilities filed a class action lawsuit in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Louisiana against the Louisiana Department of Education for failing to provide accessible free public education to students with disabilities. After negotiations, the court approved a Consent Decree in March 2015. An Independent Monitor continues to file periodical assessments as the State works toward full compliance under court supervision.

On October 26, 2010, a group of students with disabilities filed a class action lawsuit in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Louisiana against the Louisiana Department of Education for failing to provide accessible free public education to students with disabilities. After negotiations, the court approved a Consent Decree in March 2015. An Independent Monitor continues to file periodical assessments as the State works toward full compliance under court supervision.

Using the provided source, generate a concise summary: SECTION U.S. District Court District of New Jersey LIVE (Trenton) CIVIL DOCKET FOR CASE # 3 EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY COMMISSION v. U.S. ALUMINUM, INC. et al Assigned to Judge Mary L. Cooper Referred to Magistrate Judge Tonianne J. Bongiovanni Case in other court Third Circuit, Cause 29 626 Job Discrimination (Age) Date Filed Date Terminated Jury Demand SECTION PlaintiffSECTION Nature of Suit 442 Civil Rights Jobs Jurisdiction U.S. Government SECTION PlaintiffSECTION SECTION PlaintiffSECTION EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY COMMISSION represented by ELIZABETH GROSSMAN NEW YORK DISTRICT OFFICE EEOC 33 WHITEHALL STREET 5TH FLOOR NEW YORK, NY (212) Fax (212) 3623 Email [email protected] LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED KONRAD BATOG U.S. EEOC 33 WHITEHALL STREET 5TH FLOOR NEW YORK, NY 10004 Email [email protected] LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED V. SECTION DefendantSECTION U.S. ALUMINUM, INC. represented by GEOFFREY W. CASTELLO, III KELLEY DRYE & WARREN LLP ONE JEFFERSON ROAD 2ND FLOOR PARSIPPANY, NJ 07054 (973) SECTION DefendantSECTION UNITED AUTOMOBILE, AEROSPACE & AGRICULTURAL IMPLEMENT WORKERS OF AMERICA LOCAL 1668 SECTION DefendantSECTION UNITED STATES BRONZE POWDERS, INC. Email [email protected] LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED LAURI A. MAZZUCHETTI KELLEY, DRYE & WARREN, LLP ONE JEFFERSON ROAD 2ND FLOOR PARSIPPANY, NJ 07054 (973) Email [email protected] ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED represented by ROBERT T. MCGOVERN Archer, Byington, Glennon & Levine, LLP 425 Broadhollow Road SUITE 405 Melville, NY Email [email protected] LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED ROBERT CHARLES ANGELILLO ARKIN SOLBAKKEN LLP 750 LEXINGTON AVE., 25TH FLOOR NEW YORK, NY 10022 Email [email protected] ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED represented by GEOFFREY W. CASTELLO, III (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED LAURI A. MAZZUCHETTI (See above for address) ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED Cross Claimant UNITED AUTOMOBILE, AEROSPACE & AGRICULTURAL IMPLEMENT WORKERS OF AMERICA LOCAL 1668 V. Cross SECTION DefendantSECTION U.S. ALUMINUM, INC. Cross Claimant UNITED AUTOMOBILE, AEROSPACE & AGRICULTURAL IMPLEMENT WORKERS OF AMERICA LOCAL 1668 V. Cross SECTION DefendantSECTION U.S. ALUMINUM, INC. Cross SECTION DefendantSECTION UNITED STATES BRONZE POWDERS, INC. represented by ROBERT T. MCGOVERN (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED represented by GEOFFREY W. CASTELLO, III (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED LAURI A. MAZZUCHETTI (See above for address) ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED represented by ROBERT T. MCGOVERN (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED represented by GEOFFREY W. CASTELLO, III (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED LAURI A. MAZZUCHETTI (See above for address) ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED represented by GEOFFREY W. CASTELLO, III (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED Cross Claimant U.S. ALUMINUM, INC. Cross Claimant UNITED STATES BRONZE POWDERS, INC. V. Cross SECTION DefendantSECTION UNITED AUTOMOBILE, AEROSPACE & AGRICULTURAL IMPLEMENT WORKERS OF AMERICA LOCAL 1668 LAURI A. MAZZUCHETTI (See above for address) ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED represented by GEOFFREY W. CASTELLO, III (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED LAURI A. MAZZUCHETTI (See above for address) ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED represented by GEOFFREY W. CASTELLO, III (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED LAURI A. MAZZUCHETTI (See above for address) ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED represented by ROBERT T. MCGOVERN (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED Date Filed # Docket Text 1 COMPLAINT against U.S. ALUMINUM, INC., UNITED AUTOMOBILE, AEROSPACE & AGRICULTURAL IMPLEMENT WORKERS OF AMERICA LOCAL 1668 ( Filing fee $ 0 receipt number.) jury demand, filed by EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY COMMISSION.(tp ) (Entered 2 Summons Issued as to U.S. ALUMINUM, INC., UNITED AUTOMOBILE, AEROSPACE & AGRICULTURAL IMPLEMENT WORKERS OF AMERICA LOCAL Due - 20. (mailed to counsel ) (ck, ) (Entered 3 AMENDED COMPLAINT with jury trial demand against all defendants all defendants., filed by EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY COMMISSION.(BATOG, KONRAD) (Entered 4 ANSWER to Amended Complaint, CROSSCLAIM against U.S. ALUMINUM, INC. by UNITED AUTOMOBILE, AEROSPACE & AGRICULTURAL IMPLEMENT WORKERS OF AMERICA LOCAL 1668. (Attachments # 1 Certificate of Service (by ECF and Mail))(MCGOVERN, ROBERT) (Entered 5 ANSWER to Amended Complaint by U.S. ALUMINUM, INC.. (Attachments # 1 Certification of Local Civil Rule 11.2# 2 Statement of Disclosure Pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 7.1# 3 Certificate of Service)(CASTELLO, GEOFFREY) (Entered 6 ORDER Scheduling a rule 16 Conference set for 2 00 PM in Trenton - Courtroom 6E before Magistrate Judge Tonianne J. Bongiovanni.Signed by Judge Tonianne J. Bongiovanni on (Attachments # 1 ADR MEMO)(mm) (Entered 7 MOTION for Leave to File Second Amended Complaint by EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY COMMISSION. (Attachments # 1 NOTICE OF MOTION FOR LEAVE TO FILE SECOND AMENDED COMPLAINT# 2 Brief IN SUPPORT OF MOTION FOR LEAVE TO FILE SECOND AMENDED COMPLAINT# 3 Text of Proposed Order # 4 PROPOSED SECOND AMENDED COMPLAINT# 5 Certificate of Service)(BATOG, KONRAD) (Entered Set Deadline - 7 MOTION for Leave to File Second Amended Complaint set for 10 00 AM in Trenton - Courtroom 6E before Magistrate Judge Tonianne J. Bongiovanni (Please note pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 78 and Local Rule no oral argument will be held in this matter and parties should not appear unless specifically directed to do so by this Court)(DH) (Entered 8 LETTER ORDER re postponement of scheduling conference, Signed by Judge Tonianne J. Bongiovanni on (DH) (Entered 9 RESPONSE in Opposition re 7 MOTION for Leave to File Second Amended Complaint TO ADD U.S. BRONZE POWDERS, INC. AS A DEFENDANT filed by U.S. ALUMINUM, INC., U.S. ALUMINUM, INC.. (Attachments # 1 Affidavit OF EUGENE T. D'ABLEMONT# 2 Affidavit OF VINCENT VACCARO)(CASTELLO, GEOFFREY) (Entered 10 REPLY to Response to Motion re 7 MOTION for Leave to File Second Amended Complaint filed by EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY COMMISSION. (Attachments # 1 Declaration in Support of EEOC's Memorandum of Law in Reply to SECTION DefendantSECTION U.S. Aluminum's Opposition to EEOC's Motion for Leave to File Second Amended Complaint)(BATOG, KONRAD) (Entered 11 Letter from SECTION DefendantSECTION, U.S. Aluminum, Inc.. (Attachments # 1 Text of Proposed Order /CONSENT ORDER# 2 Declaration of Eugene D'Ablemont in Support of Motion for Pro Hac Vice)(CASTELLO, GEOFFREY) (Entered 12 ORDER admitting Eugene D'Abelmont, Esq. pro hac vice on behalf of the defendants. Signed by Judge Tonianne J. Bongiovanni on (ck, ) (Entered Pro Hac Vice fee for Eugene D'Ablemont, Esq. $ 150, receipt number 343632 (lk) (Entered 13 Letter from Robert T. McGovern, Esq.. (Attachments # 1 (Proposed) Consent Order Admitting Lowell Peterson, Esq. pro hac vice# 2 Supporting Affidavit of Robert T. McGovern, Esq.)(MCGOVERN, ROBERT) (Entered 14 ORDER granting pro hac vice admission of Lowell Peterson, Signed by Judge Tonianne J. Bongiovanni on (DH) (Entered Pro Hac Vice fee for Lowell Peterson, Esq. $ 150, receipt number 355787 (lk) (Entered 15 ORDER granting 7 Motion for Leave to File a Second Amended complaint by Signed by Judge Tonianne J. Bongiovanni on (ck) (Entered 16 AMENDED COMPLAINT Second Amended Complaint against all defendants all defendants., filed by EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY COMMISSION.(BATOG, KONRAD) (Entered 17 CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE by EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY COMMISSION re 16 Amended Complaint (BATOG, KONRAD) (Entered CLERK'S QUALITY CONTROL MESSAGE Regarding Document 16 Second Amended Complaint filed by K. Batog, Esq. on contained a new defendant. Counsel did not add this party to the docket at the time of filing, therefore the Clerk will correct this error and add them to the docket. (lk) (Entered 18 Answer to Second Amended Complaint ANSWER to Amended Complaint, CROSSCLAIM against U.S. ALUMINUM, INC., UNITED STATES BRONZE POWDERS, INC. by UNITED AUTOMOBILE, AEROSPACE & AGRICULTURAL IMPLEMENT WORKERS OF AMERICA LOCAL ROBERT) (Entered 19 ORDER Scheduling a rule 16 Conference set for 2 30 PM in Trenton - Courtroom 6E before Magistrate Judge Tonianne J. Bongiovanni. Signed by Judge Tonianne J. Bongiovanni on (Attachments # 1 ADR MEMO)(mm) (Entered 20 ANSWER to Complaint (Second Amended), First CROSSCLAIM against UNITED AUTOMOBILE, AEROSPACE & AGRICULTURAL IMPLEMENT WORKERS OF AMERICA LOCAL 1668 by U.S. ALUMINUM, INC., UNITED STATES BRONZE POWDERS, INC..(CASTELLO, GEOFFREY) (Entered 21 US Aluminum, Inc. ANSWER to Crossclaim of United Automobile, Aerospace & Agricultural Implement Workers of America Local 1668 by U.S. ALUMINUM, INC., UNITED STATES BRONZE POWDERS, INC..(CASTELLO, GEOFFREY) (Entered 22 ANSWER to Crossclaim set forth in the Answer to the Second Amended Complaint of of SECTION DefendantSECTION s U.S. Aluminum by UNITED AUTOMOBILE, AEROSPACE & AGRICULTURAL IMPLEMENT WORKERS OF AMERICA LOCAL ROBERT) (Entered CLERK'S QUALITY CONTROL MESSAGE Document 22 Answer submitted by ROBERT MCGOVERN, ESQ. on did not contain a proper electronic signature (s/). PLEASE RESUBMIT THE DOCUMENT WITH THE PROPER ELECTRONIC SIGNATURE BY This submission will remain on the docket unless otherwise ordered by the court. This message is for informational purposes only (ck, ) (Entered 23 REPLACES DOCKET # 22 ANSWER to Complaint Answer To Crossclaim set forth in the Answer to the Second Amended Complaint of SECTION DefendantSECTION s U.S. Aluminum by UNITED AUTOMOBILE, AEROSPACE & AGRICULTURAL IMPLEMENT WORKERS OF AMERICA LOCAL ROBERT) (Entered Minute Entry for proceedings held before Judge Tonianne J. Bongiovanni Initial Pretrial Conference held on (mm) (Entered 24 PRETRIAL SCHEDULING ORDER Settlement Conference set for 1 00 PM before Magistrate Judge Tonianne J. Bongiovanni Signed by Judge Tonianne J. Bongiovanni on (ss, ) Modified on (ss, ). (Entered Minute Entry for proceedings held before Judge Tonianne J. Bongiovanni Settlement Conference held on (mm) (Entered 25 SCHEDULING ORDER Motions due by Signed by Judge Tonianne J. Bongiovanni on (lk) (Entered 26 MOTION for Summary Judgment Notice of Motion for Summary Judgment by UNITED AUTOMOBILE, AEROSPACE & AGRICULTURAL IMPLEMENT WORKERS OF AMERICA LOCAL due by (Attachments # 1 Rule 56 Statement of Material Issues Not In Dispute On Behalf of United Automobile, Aerospace & Agricultural Implement Workers of America Local 1668# 2 Affidavit of Lowell Peterson, Esq.# 3 Affidavit of Lowell Peterson, Esq. (Exhibit 1 March 21, 2006 Letter)# 4 (Proposed) Order)(MCGOVERN, ROBERT) (Entered 27 BRIEF in Support re 26 MOTION for Summary Judgment Notice of Motion for Summary Judgment Memorandum of Law In Support of Motion for Summary Judgment On Behalf of United Automobile, Aerospace & Agricultural Implement Workers of America Local 1668 filed by UNITED AUTOMOBILE, AEROSPACE & AGRICULTURAL IMPLEMENT WORKERS OF AMERICA LOCAL 1668. (MCGOVERN, ROBERT) (Entered 28 MOTION for Summary Judgment by U.S. ALUMINUM, INC., UNITED STATES BRONZE POWDERS, INC..Responses due by (Attachments # 1 Brief # 2 Rule 56.1 Statement# 3 Affidavit of Eugene T. D'Ablemont# 4 Exhibit A-C# 5 Exhibit D-K# 6 Exhibit L-K# 7 Affidavit of Vincent Vaccaro# 8 Text of Proposed Order)(CASTELLO, GEOFFREY) (Entered Set Deadlines as to 26 MOTION for Summary Judgment Notice of Motion for Summary Judgment. Motion Hearing set for before Judge Mary L. Cooper. (PLEASE NOTE THAT PURSUANT TO FED. R. CIV. P. 78 AND LOCAL RULE NO ORAL ARGUMENT WILL BE HELD IN THIS MATTER AND PARTIES SHOULD NOT APPEAR UNLESS SPECIFICALLY DIRECTED TO DO SO BY THE COURT.)(lk) (Entered CLERKS OFFICE QUALITY CONTROL MESSAGE Document 28 Motion filed by G. Castello, Esq. on is signed by Pro hac vice counsel Eugene T. D'Ablemont, Esq. Pursuant to Local Rules 11.1 and pleadings must be signed by a member of the bar of this Court. Admission pro hac vice doesn't allow counsel to file papers before this, please refer to the Court's Order filed on document 12. Counsel of record is to Refile Motion by The Clerk will terminate the deadline. (lk) (Entered 29 MOTION for Summary Judgment (amended and refiled at request of the Clerk) by U.S. ALUMINUM, INC., UNITED STATES BRONZE POWDERS, INC..Responses due by (Attachments # 1 Memorandum of Law in Support of Their Motion for Summary Judgment# 2 Rule 56.1 Statement# 3 Affidavit of Vincent Vaccaro# 4 Affidavit of Eugene T. D'Ablemont# 5 Exhibit A-C of D'Ablemont Affidavit# 6 Exhibit D-K of D'Ablemont Affidavit# 7 Exhibit L-Q of D'Ablemont Affidavit# 8 Text of Proposed Order)(CASTELLO, GEOFFREY) (Entered Set Deadlines as to 29 MOTION for Summary Judgment (amended and refiled at request of the Clerk) MOTION for Summary Judgment (amended and refiled at request of the Clerk) MOTION for Summary Judgment (amended and refiled at request of the Clerk). Motion Hearing set for before Judge Mary L. Cooper. (PLEASE NOTE THAT PURSUANT TO FED. R. CIV. P. 78 AND LOCAL RULE NO ORAL ARGUMENT WILL BE HELD IN THIS MATTER AND PARTIES SHOULD NOT APPEAR UNLESS SPECIFICALLY DIRECTED TO DO SO BY THE COURT.)(lk) (Entered 30 Rule 7.1 Letter for extension of return date re 26 MOTION for Summary Judgment Notice of Motion for Summary Judgment filed by EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY COMMISSION. (BATOG, KONRAD) (Entered Reset Deadlines as to 26 MOTION for Summary Judgment Notice of Motion for Summary Judgment. Motion Hearing set for before Judge Mary L. Cooper. (PLEASE NOTE THAT PURSUANT TO FED. R. CIV. P. 78 AND LOCAL RULE NO ORAL ARGUMENT WILL BE HELD IN THIS MATTER AND PARTIES SHOULD NOT APPEAR UNLESS SPECIFICALLY DIRECTED TO DO SO BY THE COURT.)(lk) (Entered 31 ORDER setting briefing schedule for motion for summary judgment Signed by Judge Tonianne J. Bongiovanni on (ss, ) (Entered 32 NOTICE of Appearance by LAURI A. MAZZUCHETTI on behalf of U.S. ALUMINUM, INC., UNITED STATES BRONZE POWDERS, INC. (MAZZUCHETTI, LAURI) (Entered CLERK'S NOTE Letter request dated to extend the page limit for a brief is granted by consent at the direction of Judge Cooper. (eh, ) *** CORRECTED ON - LETTER REQUEST SUBMITTED BY PLAINTIFF.**** (Entered 33 BRIEF in Opposition re 29 MOTION for Summary Judgment (amended and refiled at request of the Clerk) MOTION for Summary Judgment (amended and refiled at request of the Clerk) MOTION for Summary Judgment (amended and refiled at request of the Clerk), 26 MOTION for Summary Judgment Notice of Motion for Summary Judgment filed by EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY COMMISSION. (Attachments # 1 Affidavit of Konrad Batog# 2 Affidavit of Juanarge Tufino# 3 Statement of Disputed and Undisputed Facts)(BATOG, KONRAD) (Entered 34 Cross MOTION for Summary Judgment, or in the Alternative to Stay Summary Judgment on Select Issues and Provide SECTION PlaintiffSECTION with Additional Discovery (Brief, Affidavits, and Statement of Undisputed and Disputed Facts in Support of Cross-Motion filed with Docket Number 33) by EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY COMMISSION.Responses due by (Attachments # 1 Text of Proposed Order # 2 Certificate of Service)(BATOG, KONRAD) (Entered Set Deadlines as to Cross-motion for summary judgment Motion Hearing set for before Judge Mary L. Cooper. (PLEASE NOTE THAT PURSUANT TO FED. R. CIV. P. 78 AND LOCAL RULE NO ORAL ARGUMENT WILL BE HELD IN THIS MATTER AND PARTIES SHOULD NOT APPEAR UNLESS SPECIFICALLY DIRECTED TO DO SO BY THE COURT.)(lk) (Entered 35 Letter from Geoffrey Castello. (CASTELLO, GEOFFREY) (Entered 36 RESPONSE in Support re 29 MOTION for Summary Judgment (amended and refiled at request of the Clerk) MOTION for Summary Judgment (amended and refiled at request of the Clerk) MOTION for Summary Judgment (amended and refiled at request of the Clerk) filed by U.S. ALUMINUM, INC., UNITED STATES BRONZE POWDERS, INC.. (CASTELLO, GEOFFREY) (Entered Reseting Deadlines as to 29 & 34 Motions. Motions set for 10 00 AM in Trenton - Courtroom 5W before Judge Mary L. Cooper. (PLEASE NOTE THAT PURSUANT TO FED. R. CIV. P. 78 AND LOCAL RULE NO ORAL ARGUMENT WILL BE HELD IN THIS MATTER AND PARTIES SHOULD NOT APPEAR UNLESS SPECIFICALLY DIRECTED TO DO SO BY THE COURT.) (ij, ) (Entered 37 BRIEF in Opposition to the EEOC's Cross-Motion for Summary Judgment filed by U.S. ALUMINUM, INC., UNITED STATES BRONZE POWDERS, INC.. (Attachments # 1 Affidavit of Linda Trigas)(CASTELLO, GEOFFREY) (Entered 38 RESPONSE in Support (UAW Reply Memorandum of Law in Support of Motion for Summary Judgment and in Opposition to Cross-Motion for Summary Judgment) filed by UNITED AUTOMOBILE, AEROSPACE & AGRICULTURAL IMPLEMENT WORKERS OF AMERICA LOCAL 1668. (Attachments # 1 Supplemental Affidavit of Lowell Peterson, Esq.)(MCGOVERN, ROBERT) (Entered 39 RESPONSE in Support re 29 MOTION for Summary Judgment (amended and refiled at request of the Clerk) MOTION for Summary Judgment (amended and refiled at request of the Clerk) MOTION for Summary Judgment (amended and refiled at request of the Clerk)(amended and refiled) filed by U.S. ALUMINUM, INC., UNITED STATES BRONZE POWDERS, INC.. (CASTELLO, GEOFFREY) (Entered 40 BRIEF in Support of SECTION PlaintiffSECTION's Rule 56(a) Cross-Motion for Summary Judgment and in Support of SECTION PlaintiffSECTION's Rule 56(f) Cross-Motion, Made in the Alternative, to Stay Summary Judgment on Select Issues and Provide SECTION PlaintiffSECTION with Additional Discovery filed by EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY COMMISSION. (BATOG, KONRAD) (Entered 41 CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE by EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY COMMISSION re 40 Brief in Support of Motion, (BATOG, KONRAD) (Entered 42 MOTION to Strike SECTION PlaintiffSECTION's Reply Memorandum of Law by U.S. ALUMINUM, INC., UNITED STATES BRONZE POWDERS, INC..Responses due by (Attachments # 1 Brief In Support Of Motion To Strike SECTION PlaintiffSECTION's Memorandum Or In The Alternative For Leave To Submit A Response# 2 Text of Proposed Order)(CASTELLO, GEOFFREY) (Entered Setting Deadlines as to 42 MOTION to Strike SECTION PlaintiffSECTION's Reply Memorandum of Law. Motion set for 10 00 AM in Trenton Courtroom 5W before Judge Mary L. Cooper. (PLEASE NOTE THAT PURSUANT TO FED. R. CIV. P. 78 AND LOCAL RULE NO ORAL ARGUMENT WILL BE HELD IN THIS MATTER AND PARTIES SHOULD NOT APPEAR UNLESS SPECIFICALLY DIRECTED TO DO SO BY THE COURT.) (ij, ) (Entered 43 BRIEF in Opposition re 42 MOTION to Strike SECTION PlaintiffSECTION's Reply Memorandum of Law filed by EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY COMMISSION. (Attachments # 1 Certificate of Service)(BATOG, KONRAD) (Entered 44 NOTICE of Appearance by ROBERT CHARLES ANGELILLO on behalf of UNITED AUTOMOBILE, AEROSPACE & AGRICULTURAL IMPLEMENT WORKERS OF AMERICA LOCAL 1668 (ANGELILLO, ROBERT) (Entered 45 RESPONSE in Support re 42 MOTION to Strike SECTION PlaintiffSECTION's Reply Memorandum of Law filed by U.S. ALUMINUM, INC., UNITED STATES BRONZE POWDERS, INC.. (CASTELLO, GEOFFREY) (Entered ORAL ARGUMENT set for 02 00 PM before Judge Mary L. Cooper re pending motions for summary judgment. (Confirmed via telephone w/counsel for dft.) (eh, ) (Entered 46 Minute Entry for proceedings held before Judge Mary L. Cooper Motion Hearing held on re motions for summary judgment.Ordered motions taken under advisement. (ESR HANEKE.) (eh, ) (Entered 47 MEMORANDUM OPINION. Signed by Judge Mary L. Cooper on (lk) (Entered 48 ORDER & JUDGMENT granting 26 Motion for Summary Judgment; granting 29 Motion for Summary Judgment; denying 34 Motion for Summary Judgment; denied as moot 42 Motion to Strike; and directing the Clerk to close action. Signed by Judge Mary L. Cooper on (lk) (Entered 49 TRANSCRIPT of MOTION HEARING held on MAY 9, 2008 before Judge MARY L. COOPER. Court Reporter MELISSA HANEKE. PLEASE NOTE The complete transcript of these proceedings is maintained in paper format on file in the Clerks Office. To request copies of this transcript, contact the Official Court Reporter or Transcription Service who prepared the transcript. (mmh) (Main Document 49 replaced on (kas). (Entered 50 NOTICE OF APPEAL as to 48 Order on Motion for Summary Judgment, Order on Motion to Strike, by EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY COMMISSION. The Clerk's Office hereby certifies the record and the docket sheet available through ECF to be the certified list in lieu of the record and/or the certified copy of the docket entries. (Attachments # 1 Certificate of Service)(BATOG, KONRAD) (Entered 52 USCA Case Number for 50 Notice of Appeal (USCA), Notice of Appeal (USCA) filed by EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY COMMISSION. USCA Case Manager Carolyn Hicks (Document Restricted - Court Only) ) (Entered 51 TRANSCRIPT REQUEST NOT REQUESTED by EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY COMMISSION (ij, ) (Entered 53 CERTIFIED ORDER of USCA in lieu of formal MANDATE as to 50 Notice of Appeal (USCA), Notice of Appeal (USCA) filed by EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY COMMISSION, dismissing case pursuant to Fed. R. App. P. 42(b). ) (Entered Summary: In August 2006, the EEOC brought this suit in the U.S. District Court for the District of New Jersey on behalf of two employees over aged 60 who received reduced severance pay after their plant closed. It alleged that reducing the severance pay of employees over 60 who qualified for pensions violated the Age Discrimination in Employment Act. On May 27, 2008, the court ruled in favor of the defendants and awarded no relief.

In August 2006, the EEOC brought this suit in the U.S. District Court for the District of New Jersey on behalf of two employees over aged 60 who received reduced severance pay after their plant closed. It alleged that reducing the severance pay of employees over 60 who qualified for pensions violated the Age Discrimination in Employment Act. On May 27, 2008, the court ruled in favor of the defendants and awarded no relief.

Using the provided source, generate a concise summary: SECTION Case 1 Document 281 Filed Page 1 of 3 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF MARYLAND Northern Division FRANKLIN SAVAGE, et al., SECTION PlaintiffSECTION s, and UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Case No. 1 Intervenor-SECTION PlaintiffSECTION s, v. POCOMOKE CITY, et al., SECTION DefendantSECTION s. NOTICE OF ACCEPTANCE OF OFFERS OF JUDGMENT This filing is to notify the Court that SECTION PlaintiffSECTION s Kelvin Sewell and Lynell Green have accepted offers of judgment made to them by SECTION DefendantSECTION Pocomoke City under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 68. Pocomoke City served the offers on March 8, 2019. Messrs. Sewell and Green in turn served written notices of their respective acceptances within the 14-day period allotted by Rule 68.1 The offers and acceptances are attached to this filing for the Court’s See Exs. A – B. The accepted offers included proposed consent decree terms subject to further negotiation. When negotiations have concluded, the Court will receive requests to enter judgment, including approval of the finalized consent decree terms. Dated March 27, 2019 Respectfully submitted, /s/ Dennis A. Corkery 1 Mr. Sewell initially served a notice on March 13, 2019. After clarifications between counsel, Mr. Sewell served a revised notice on March 17. It is the March 17 acceptance that is attached to this filing and that is being treated by Mr. Sewell and Pocomoke City as the operative notice. 2 Counsel for Pocomoke City agreed to accept service of such notices by email as provided for by Federal Rule of Civil Procedure Case 1 Document 281 Filed Page 2 of 3 Dennis A. Corkery (D. Md. Bar No. 19076) Washington Lawyers’ Committee for Civil Rights and Urban Affairs 11 Dupont Circle, NW Suite 400 Washington, DC 20036 TEL FAX EMAIL [email protected] /s/ Craig Smith Craig Smith (D. Md. Bar No. 17938) Theodore A. Howard (pro hac vice) Charles C. Lemley (pro hac vice) Brian G. Walsh (pro hac vice) Kendra P. Norwood (D. Md. Bar No. 18536) Madeline J. Cohen (pro hac vice) Moshe B. Broder (D. Md. Bar No. 19818) Wiley Rein LLP 1776 K Street, NW Washington, DC 20006 TEL FAX EMAIL [email protected] /s/ Deborah A. Jeon Deborah A. Jeon (D. Md. Bar No. 06905) Sonia Kumar (D. Md. Bar No. 07196) ACLU of Maryland 3600 Clipper Mill Road, Suite 350 Baltimore, MD 21211 TEL FAX EMAIL [email protected] Counsel for SECTION PlaintiffSECTION s Franklin Savage, Kelvin Sewell, and Lynell Green 2 Case 1 Document 281 Filed Page 3 of 3 CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I hereby certify that on March 27, 2019, I electronically filed the foregoing with the Clerk of the Court for the United States District Court for the District of Maryland by using the CM/ECF system. Participants in the case who are registered CM/ECF users will be served by the CM/ECF system. /s/ Craig Smith Craig Smith WILEY REIN LLP 1776 K Street, NW Washington, DC 20006 TEL (202) FAX (202) EMAIL [email protected] Case 1 Document 281-1 Filed Page 1 of 17 Exhibit A Case 1 Document 281-1 Filed Page 2 of 17 From Sent To Cc Subject Attachments Smith, Craig Sunday, March 17, 2019 9 11 PM 'Mike Rynd'; 'Daniel Karp' Barbara Schwabauer; Valerie Meyer; 'Woodard, Karen (CRT)'; Kathleen Lawrence; 'Schellenberg, Kali (CRT)'; '[email protected]'; 'Phillip M. Pickus -State Police-'; 'Carl Zacarias'; Howard, Theodore; Walsh, Brian; Dennis Corkery; Debbie Jeon; Sonia Kumar; Norwood, Kendra; Broder, Moshe; Lemley, Charlie; Cohen, Madeline Savage et al v. Pocomoke City et al. - K. Sewell acceptance of Rule 68 offer Kelvin Sewell Acceptance of 3-8-19 Rule 68 Offer from Pocomoke City Dan, Mike I’ve attached notice that Kelvin Sewell accepts the offer that Pocomoke City made to him on March 8, 2019, for judgment under Rule 68. Best, Craig Craig Smith | Attorney at Law Wiley Rein LLP 1776 K Street NW | Washington, DC 20006 T | [email protected] www.wileyrein.com | Bio | LinkedIn | Twitter. 1 Case 1 Document 281-1 Filed Page 3 of 17 • ~!\'ffi!.IJ ~~ W ASHINGTON L AWY Summary: In 2016, three Pocomoke City, Maryland police officers filed this lawsuit in the U.S. District Court for the District of Maryland. The plaintiffs alleged that they suffered racial discrimination and retaliation by their employer in violation of their First and Fourteenth Amendment rights and the Civil Rights Act of 1964. In 2019, two of the officers reached a partial settlement with Pocomoke City requiring adoption of anti-discrimination policies and procedures by the police department and awarding monetary damages to the officers. As of September 30, 2020, the case is still ongoing pending a final settlement.

In 2016, three Pocomoke City, Maryland police officers filed this lawsuit in the U.S. District Court for the District of Maryland. The plaintiffs alleged that they suffered racial discrimination and retaliation by their employer in violation of their First and Fourteenth Amendment rights and the Civil Rights Act of 1964. In 2019, two of the officers reached a partial settlement with Pocomoke City requiring adoption of anti-discrimination policies and procedures by the police department and awarding monetary damages to the officers. As of September 30, 2020, the case is still ongoing pending a final settlement.

Using the provided source, generate a concise summary: SECTION Case 1 Document 1 Filed Page 1 of 17 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA ) THE TRUSTEES OF PRINCETON ) UNIVERSITY, ) Princeton, New Jersey 08544 ) SECTION PlaintiffSECTION, ) ) v. ) ) UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF ) EDUCATION, ) 400 Maryland Avenue, SW ) Washington, DC 20202, ) ) and ) ) UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF ) EDUCATION, OFFICE FOR CIVIL RIGHTS, ) 32 Old Slip, 26th Floor ) New York, NY 10005, ) ) SECTION DefendantSECTION s. ) Civil Action No. _______________ COMPLAINT SECTION PlaintiffSECTION The Trustees of Princeton University (the “University”), by and through its attorneys, hereby complains against SECTION DefendantSECTION s United States Department of Education (the “Department”), and its sub-agency the United States Department of Education, Office for Civil Rights (“OCR”), as follows INTRODUCTION 1. The University brings this “reverse FOIA” action pursuant to the Administrative Procedure Act, 5 U.S.C. §§ the Freedom of Information Act (“FOIA”), 5 U.S.C. § 552, and the Trade Secrets Act, 18 U.S.C. § 1905, to prevent the disclosure of certain confidential and Case 1 Document 1 Filed Page 2 of 17 commercially sensitive documents and information relating to the University’s undergraduate admissions program submitted to OCR in the course of an OCR compliance review. These materials fall generally into two categories (1) documents and information about undergraduate applicants to the University (“Applicant Documents and Information”), and (2) documents and information about the University’s proprietary admissions processes (“Admissions Documents and Information”). The University does not object to OCR producing documents that OCR itself generated in the course of its compliance review, to the extent OCR generated documents do not incorporate or quote those documents the University is seeking to protect. 2. The materials at issue are the subject of a pending FOIA request, Department of Education FOIA Request Number (the “FOIA Request”), and accompanying suit to compel disclosure, Students for Fair Admissions, Inc. v. U.S. Department of Education, No. 1 (D.D.C.) (the “FOIA Action”). In that case, the plaintiff is seeking an order directing the Department to produce “all documents concerning the investigation of Princeton University in OCR Case Number which includes the Applicant Documents and Information and Admissions Documents and Information. 3. The Applicant Documents and Information and Admissions Documents and Information are composed of sensitive applicant and admissions information and data that the University disclosed to OCR in response to specific requests by OCR during the compliance review, in good faith and in a spirit of voluntary cooperation to assist OCR. These materials include, but are not limited to, specific applicants’ admission files, highly sensitive data about applicants that was requested by OCR (and assembled by the University solely for the purpose of responding to OCR’s request), information about how the University evaluates applicants for admission, and information about how the University conducts its admissions program. Moreover, 2 Case 1 Document 1 Filed Page 3 of 17 before providing any materials to OCR in the compliance review, the University specifically asked OCR how OCR would respond to a FOIA request for these materials, and received assurance from OCR that it would adequately protect the rights and interests of both the applicants and the University. 4. The University has at all times maintained that the Applicant Documents and Information and Admissions Documents and Information are exempt from disclosure pursuant to FOIA Exemption 4, which exempts from disclosure “trade secrets and commercial or financial information obtained from a person and privileged or confidential.” 5 U.S.C. § To that end, each of the documents the University seeks to withhold from release was designated and marked, “Confidential, Private, Personal and Proprietary – Exempt Summary: Princeton sued U.S. Department of Education and OCR in a reverse FOIA to stop them from releasing documents related to an OCR compliance review to Students for Fair Admissions, Inc., which had submitted a FOIA request and filed a lawsuit against the DOE to compel disclosure. Parties voluntarily dismissed case.

Princeton sued U.S. Department of Education and OCR in a reverse FOIA to stop them from releasing documents related to an OCR compliance review to Students for Fair Admissions, Inc., which had submitted a FOIA request and filed a lawsuit against the DOE to compel disclosure. Parties voluntarily dismissed case.

Using the provided source, generate a concise summary: SECTION 473 F.3d 237 (2006) COALITION TO DEFEND AFFIRMATIVE ACTION, et al., SECTION PlaintiffSECTION s-Appellees, v. Jennifer GRANHOLM, et al., SECTION DefendantSECTION s-Appellees, Michael Cox, Attorney General, Intervenor SECTION DefendantSECTION, Eric Russell, Intervenor-Appellant. Toward a Fair Michigan, Proposed Intervenor-Appellant. Eric Russell; Toward A Fair Michigan, Petitioners. Nos. United States Court of Appeals, Sixth Circuit. Decided and Filed December 29, 2006. 2389 *238 *239 George B. Washington, Scheff & Washington, Detroit, MI, for SECTION PlaintiffSECTION s-Appellees. James E. Long, Asst. Atty. General, Office of the Attorney General Tort Defense Division, Lansing, MI, for SECTION DefendantSECTION s-Appellees. Center for Individual Rights, Washington, DC, Kerry L. Morgan, Pentiuk, Couvreue & Kobiljal, Wyandotte, MI, Michael E. Rosman, Kerry L. Morgan, for Proposed Intervenors-Appellants/Petitioners. Before SUHRHEINRICH, BATCHELDER, and SUTTON, Circuit Judges. OPINION SUTTON, Circuit Judge. On November 7, 2006, the people of Michigan approved a statewide ballot initiative 0907 Proposal 2 0907 which amended the Michigan Constitution to prohibit discrimination or preferential treatment based on race or gender in the operation of public employment, public education or public contracting in the State. Under the Michigan 240 Constitution, the proposal was scheduled *240 to go into effect on December 23, 2006. At stake today is whether the federal courts should permit this state initiative to go into effect or whether we should preliminarily enjoin it in the part, that is, that applies to public universities and to all applicants to those universities. While the Michigan state courts remain free to suspend enforcement of Proposal 2 under state law for all manner of reasons, including those urged upon us about the meaning of the law, uncertainty about the law's impact on current admissions policies and uncertainty about changing admissions policies in the middle of the current enrollment we are unable to identify any tenable basis under federal law for suspending the law's enforcement. The First and Fourteenth Amendments to the United States Constitution, to be sure, permit States to use racial and gender preferences under narrowly defined circumstances. But they do not mandate them, and accordingly they do not prohibit a State from eliminating them. In the absence of any likelihood of prevailing in invalidating this state initiative on federal grounds, we have no choice but to permit its enforcement in accordance with the state-law framework that gave it birth. I. Legal and policy debates about admissions preferences in the university setting are not new to the people of Michigan. In 2003, the Supreme Court invalidated the University of Michigan's race-based admissions preferences in Gratz v. Bollinger, 539 U.S. 244, 123 S.Ct. 2411, 156 257, and it upheld the University of Michigan School of Law's race-based admissions preferences in Grutter v. Bollinger, 539 U.S. 306, 123 S.Ct. 2325, 156 304. In apparent response to those decisions, the Michigan Civil Rights Initiative, the executive director of which is Jennifer Gratz, the lead plaintiff in Gratz v. Bollinger, began a campaign to place a proposal on the state ballot that would amend the Michigan Constitution to prohibit race-and gender-based preferences in public employment, education and contracting. See The Michigan Civil Rights Initiative, http // www.michigancivilrights.org (last visited Dec. 26, 2006). A. On January 6, 2005, Gratz announced that her organization had obtained enough signatures under Michigan law to place its named Proposal 06-2 but commonly referred to as Proposal 2 on 0907 the statewide ballot. See http // (last visited Dec. 26, 2006). The Michigan Board of State Canvassers eventually approved the ballot language for Proposal 2, which would amend Article I, § 26 of the Michigan Constitution if approved. On November 7, 2006, the people of Mic Summary: On November 7, 2006, the people of Michigan approved by majority vote a statewide ballot initiative-Proposal amended the Michigan Constitution to prohibit discrimination or preferential treatment based on race or gender in the operation of public employment, public education or public contracting in the State. Both Proposal 2 and the University of Michigan's announcement that it would comply triggered litigation. On November 15, 2012, the en banc Sixth Circuit held that Proposal 2 created a comparative structural burden that undermined the Equal Protection Clause (which the court called the political process argument). Accordingly, the court found Proposal 2 unconstitutional. On March 24, 2013, the Supreme Court granted review of the case. Argument will be after the Court's summer break. On October 15, 2013 the Supreme Court heard oral argument in the case. In an opinion written by Justice Kennedy and joined by Justice Roberts and Justice Alito, the court reversed the Sixth Circuit. There were two concurring opinions and a single dissent. In his opinion Kennedy asserts that this is not a case about resolving the debate about racial preferences, but rather about whether it is constitutional for Michigan to allow its voters to decide the issue. The court holds that there is no authority in the Federal Constitution or in this Court’s precedents for the Judiciary to set aside Michigan laws that commit to the voters the determination whether racial preferences may be considered in governmental decisions, in particular with respect to school admissions.

On November 7, 2006, the people of Michigan approved by majority vote a statewide ballot initiative-Proposal amended the Michigan Constitution to prohibit discrimination or preferential treatment based on race or gender in the operation of public employment, public education or public contracting in the State. Both Proposal 2 and the University of Michigan's announcement that it would comply triggered litigation. On November 15, 2012, the en banc Sixth Circuit held that Proposal 2 created a comparative structural burden that undermined the Equal Protection Clause (which the court called the political process argument). Accordingly, the court found Proposal 2 unconstitutional. On March 24, 2013, the Supreme Court granted review of the case. Argument will be after the Court's summer break. On October 15, 2013 the Supreme Court heard oral argument in the case. In an opinion written by Justice Kennedy and joined by Justice Roberts and Justice Alito, the court reversed the Sixth Circuit. There were two concurring opinions and a single dissent. In his opinion Kennedy asserts that this is not a case about resolving the debate about racial preferences, but rather about whether it is constitutional for Michigan to allow its voters to decide the issue. The court holds that there is no authority in the Federal Constitution or in this Court’s precedents for the Judiciary to set aside Michigan laws that commit to the voters the determination whether racial preferences may be considered in governmental decisions, in particular with respect to school admissions.

Using the provided source, generate a concise summary: SECTION Case 1 Document 37 Filed Page 1 of 5 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF MARYLAND CARMEN’S CORNER STORE, et al., SECTION PlaintiffSECTION s, v. UNITED STATES SMALL BUSINESS ADMINISTRATION, et al., SECTION DefendantSECTION s. DEFY VENTURES, INC., et al., SECTION PlaintiffSECTION s, v. UNITED STATES SMALL BUSINESS ADMINISTRATION, et al., SECTION DefendantSECTION s. ) ) ) ) ) ) No. 1 ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) No. 1 ) ) ) ) ) DEFENDANTS’ NOTICE OF FILING The United States Small Business Administration, et al. (“SECTION DefendantSECTION s”) file herewith the attached Declaration of William J. Briggs, regarding questions SECTION PlaintiffSECTION s raise in reply concerning SECTION DefendantSECTION s’ efforts “to ensure that newly eligible businesses are aware of or can benefit from” the June 24, 2020, revisions to the First PPP Interim Final Rule. See, e.g., Defy Ventures Pls.’ Mem. in Reply to Defs.’ Opp’n to Injunctive Relief, ECF No. 34, at 1. Dated June 26, 2020 Respectfully submitted, JOSEPH H. HUNT Assistant Attorney General DAVID M. MORRELL Deputy Assistant Attorney General Case 1 Document 37 Filed Page 2 of 5 JOHN R. GRIFFITHS Director ERIC WOMACK Assistant Director /s/ James J. Gilligan JAMES J. GILLIGAN Special Litigation Counsel INDRANEEL SUR Trial Attorney Federal Programs Branch, Civil Division United States Department of Justice P.O. Box 883 Washington, D.C. 20044 Telephone (202) E-mail [email protected] Counsel for SECTION DefendantSECTION s 2 Case 1 Document 37 Filed Page 3 of 5 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF MARYLAND CARMEN’S CORNER STORE, et al., SECTION PlaintiffSECTION s, v. UNITED STATES SMALL BUSINESS ADMINISTRATION, et al., SECTION DefendantSECTION s. DEFY VENTURES, INC., et al., SECTION PlaintiffSECTION s, v. UNITED STATES SMALL BUSINESS ADMINISTRATION, et al., SECTION DefendantSECTION s. ) ) ) ) ) ) No. 1 ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) No. 1 ) ) ) ) ) DECLARATION OF WILLIAM J. BRIGGS I, William J. Briggs, for my declaration pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1746, depose and say as follows 1. I am a Deputy Associate Administrator for the Office of Capital Access of the United States Small Business Administration (“SBA”). The Office of Capital Access is responsible for the operation of and development of policy for the SBA’s business loan programs authorized under Section 7(a) of the Small Business Act, and the Paycheck Protection Program (“PPP”) authorized under the Coronavirus Aid, Relief, and Economic Security (“CARES”) Act. I am knowledgeable about the Section 7(a) and PPP programs. 2. I submit this declaration in support of the SECTION DefendantSECTION s’ opposition to the SECTION PlaintiffSECTION s’ motions for temporary restraining orders and preliminary injunctions in the above-captioned Case 1 Document 37 Filed Page 4 of 5 actions. The statements contained in this declaration are based on my personal knowledge and information made available to me in the course of carrying out my duties and responsibilities as SBA Deputy Associate Administrator for the Office of Capital Access. 3. Attached to this declaration is a true and correct copy of the Paycheck Protection Program (PPP) Policy Update issued by the SBA on Wednesday, June 24, 2020. The update notifies recipients that there have been eligibility revisions to the PPP First Interim Final Rule (85 Fed. Reg. 20811 (Apr. 15, and provides a link to the rule amendment concerning the eligibility of applicants and applicant owners with criminal justice histories. 4. In accordance with SBA practice concerning policy updates of this nature, on June 24, 2020, at 10 45 a.m. eastern time, I e-mailed the attached update to a distribution list that includes 18 national trade associations for all types of lenders, large individual lenders, and most new non-bank lenders; SBA field staff and senior headquarters staff; external affairs officials at the Federal Reserve, FDIC, OCC, NCUA, Treasury, the SEC, and USDA, who actively engage with multiple lender communities; the Minority Business Development Agency at the Department of Commerce; State bank supervisors; and major business groups, religious organizations and non-profit council groups. 5. The update asks that each recipient “ p lease distribute this message throughout your PPP lending community.” Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1746, I declare under penalty of perjury that the foregoing is true and correct to the best of my knowledge and belief. Executed this 27th day of June, 2020. William J. Briggs WILLIAM J. BRIGGS 2 Case 1 Document 37 Filed Page 5 of 5 From To Subject Date Briggs, William J. Briggs, William J. PPP Policy Update – Wednesday, June 24, 2020 Wednesday, June 24, 2020 10 45 19 AM Please distribute this message throughout your PPP lending community Paycheck Protection Program (PPP) Policy Update – Wednesday, June 24, 2020 SBA & Treasury have recently released additional guidance Interim Final Rule - Additional Eligibility Revisions to First Interim Final Rule (Released June 24, 2020) Note This IFR is being posted in advance of publication in the Federal Register. The official version will appear in the Federal Register. For more information and updates, visit SBA.gov/PaycheckProtection or Treasury.gov/CARES Bill Briggs Deputy Associate Administrator, Office of Capital Access U.S. Small Business Administration Home Page | Twitter | Instagram | Facebook | YouTube | LinkedIn | Email Alerts Summary: In response to the economic crisis caused by the pandemic of 2020, Congress passed the CARES Act, which created, among other things, the “Paycheck Protection Program.” Under this program, small business owners could apply for a loan from the Small Business Administration; if they later certified that all of the loan funds had been used for qualifying expenses, the loan would be forgiven. The SBA’s rules disqualified many small business owners with criminal records. Several small business owners brought this lawsuit against the SBA in the U.S. District Court for the District of Maryland, challenging this criminal record exclusion. On June 29, the court granted a preliminary injunction requiring the SBA to extend the application deadline for the named plaintiffs from June 30 to July 21, 2020. The following week, Congress passed follow-up legislation extending the deadline for all applicants to August 8, 2020. As of July 29, 2020, further developments in the litigation are pending.

In response to the economic crisis caused by the pandemic of 2020, Congress passed the CARES Act, which created, among other things, the “Paycheck Protection Program.” Under this program, small business owners could apply for a loan from the Small Business Administration; if they later certified that all of the loan funds had been used for qualifying expenses, the loan would be forgiven. The SBA’s rules disqualified many small business owners with criminal records. Several small business owners brought this lawsuit against the SBA in the U.S. District Court for the District of Maryland, challenging this criminal record exclusion. On June 29, the court granted a preliminary injunction requiring the SBA to extend the application deadline for the named plaintiffs from June 30 to July 21, 2020. The following week, Congress passed follow-up legislation extending the deadline for all applicants to August 8, 2020. As of July 29, 2020, further developments in the litigation are pending.

Using the provided source, generate a concise summary: SECTION UNI'fED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT F I LED OCT 20 2004 CATHY A. CAmRSON, CiBlK U.s. COURT OF APPEALs EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY COMMISSION, SECTION PlaintiffSECTION - Appellee, v. No. D.C. No. Western District of Washington, Seattle LAIDLAW INC; et al., SECTION DefendantSECTION s - Appellants, v. SHERYL EVERSON, ORDER. =~ 11> LMI IL I OCl 26 2004 SECTION PlaintiffSECTION -intervenor - Appellee. EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY COMMISSION, SECTION PlaintiffSECTION - Appellant, v. LAIDLAW INC; et a!., SECTION DefendantSECTION s - Appellees. No. D.C. No. Westein District of Washington, Seattle 02,( EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTIJNITY COMMISSION, SECTION PlaintiffSECTION - Appellee, v. LAIDLAW INC; et aI., SECTION DefendantSECTION s - Appellants, v. SHERYL EVERSON, SECTION PlaintiffSECTION -intervenor - Appellant. No. D.C. No. Western District of Washington, Seattle The parties have stipulated to the dismissal of these appeals under Fed. R. App. P. 42(b). These appeals are dismissed with prejudice. Costs shall be allocated according to the provisions of the stipulation. A certified copy of this order sent to the district court shall act as and for the mandate of this court. pro 10.18 Cathie A. Gottlie Deputy Clerk Ninth Cir. R and Ninth Circuit 27-10 2 Summary: In March 2002, the Seattle District Office of the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission sued Laidlaw Inc., a school bus company, in the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Washington for alleged violations of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. The complainant intervened in May 2002, alleging that the defendant violated the Washington Law Against Discrimination and state tort law by discriminating against her on the basis of sex. The defendant moved for summary judgment, which was granted in part and denied in part. The case went to trial in June 2003. The court ruled in favor of the plaintiffs on their federal and state law claims and in favor of the defendant with regard to punitive and injunctive relief. The court awarded in economic damages and in non-economic damages. The parties appealed in September 2004, but the appeals were dismissed in October 2004.

In March 2002, the Seattle District Office of the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission sued Laidlaw Inc., a school bus company, in the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Washington for alleged violations of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. The complainant intervened in May 2002, alleging that the defendant violated the Washington Law Against Discrimination and state tort law by discriminating against her on the basis of sex. The defendant moved for summary judgment, which was granted in part and denied in part. The case went to trial in June 2003. The court ruled in favor of the plaintiffs on their federal and state law claims and in favor of the defendant with regard to punitive and injunctive relief. The court awarded in economic damages and in non-economic damages. The parties appealed in September 2004, but the appeals were dismissed in October 2004.

Using the provided source, generate a concise summary: SECTION U.S. District Court Middle District of Tennessee (Nashville) CIVIL DOCKET FOR CASE # 3 BROWN, CLOSED Wilson, et al v. Cendant Corporation, et al Assigned to District Judge William J. Haynes, Jr Demand Cause 42 2000e Job Discrimination (Employment) SECTION PlaintiffSECTION Date Filed Date Terminated Jury Demand Both Nature of Suit 442 Civil Rights Jobs Jurisdiction Federal Question Patricia Wilson represented by Grant Morris Law Offices of Grant Morris 1666 Connecticut Avenue, NW Suite 310 Washington, DC 20009 (202) Fax (202) Email [email protected] LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED Jerry Gonzalez Jerry Gonzalez, P.C. 2441-Q Old Fort Parkway Box 381 Murfreesboro, TN 37128 (615) Fax (615) Email [email protected] LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED Lisa A. Goldblatt Sanford, Wittels &Heisler, LLP 1666 Connecticut Avenue, NW Suite 310 Washington, DC 20009 (202) Fax (202) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED David W. Sanford Sanford, Wittels &Heisler, LLP 1666 Connecticut Avenue, NW Suite 310 Washington, DC 20009 (202) Fax (202) Email [email protected] ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED SECTION PlaintiffSECTION Renita Chadwell represented by Grant Morris (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED SECTION Case SECTION 3 Jerry Gonzalez (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY As of 11 22 AM CDT 1 of 9 ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED Lisa A. Goldblatt (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED David W. Sanford (See above for address) ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED SECTION PlaintiffSECTION Teresa Faw represented by Grant Morris (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED Jerry Gonzalez (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED Lisa A. Goldblatt (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED David W. Sanford (See above for address) ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED SECTION PlaintiffSECTION Tamara Pacwa individually and on behalf of others similarly situated, and represented by Grant Morris (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED Jerry Gonzalez (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED Lisa A. Goldblatt (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED David W. Sanford (See above for address) ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED SECTION PlaintiffSECTION Shannon Matthews represented by Grant Morris (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED Jerry Gonzalez (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED Lisa A. Goldblatt SECTION Case SECTION 3 As of 11 22 AM CDT 2 of 9 SECTION PlaintiffSECTION George Chip Pennington (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED David W. Sanford (See above for address) ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED represented by Grant Morris (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED Jerry Gonzalez (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED Lisa A. Goldblatt (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED David W. Sanford (See above for address) ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED V. SECTION DefendantSECTION Cendant Corporation TERMINATED SECTION DefendantSECTION Fairfield Resorts, Inc. SECTION Case SECTION 3 represented by Waverly David Crenshaw, Jr. Waller, Lansden, Dortch &Davis Nashville City Center 511 Union Street Suite 2100 Nashville, TN 37219 (615) Email [email protected] TERMINATED LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED represented by C. Geoffrey Weirich Paul, Hastings, Janofsky &Walker 600 Peachtree Street, NW Suite 2400 Atlanta, GA (404) Email [email protected] LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED Jason D. Fisher Waller, Lansden, Dortch &Davis Nashville City Center 511 Union Street Suite 2100 Nashville, TN 37219 (615) Email [email protected] As of 11 22 AM CDT 3 of 9 LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED Jennifer Lynn Kirk Paul, Hastings, Janofsky &Walker 600 Peachtree Street, NW Suite 2400 Atlanta, GA (404) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED Waverly David Crenshaw, Jr. (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED SECTION DefendantSECTION Mickey Ruggiero represented by Waverly David Crenshaw, Jr. (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED SECTION DefendantSECTION John Dave Labelle represented by C. Geoffrey Weirich (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED Jason D. Fisher (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED Jennifer Lynn Kirk (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED Waverly David Crenshaw, Jr. (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED SECTION DefendantSECTION Tim Hurley represented by Waverly David Crenshaw, Jr. (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED SECTION DefendantSECTION Danny Higdon represented by Waverly David Crenshaw, Jr. (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED SECTION DefendantSECTION Todd Griffin represented by Waverly David Crenshaw, Jr. (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED SECTION Case SECTION 3 As of 11 22 AM CDT 4 of 9 SECTION DefendantSECTION Devon Boyd SECTION DefendantSECTION Pat Doyle SECTION DefendantSECTION Rob Crawford SECTION DefendantSECTION Scott Roberson SECTION DefendantSECTION James Graves SECTION DefendantSECTION Ray Moore SECTION DefendantSECTION Mike Pierce SECTION DefendantSECTION Mike Thompson SECTION DefendantSECTION Daric Fail SECTION DefendantSECTION Sharon Barnes SECTION Case SECTION 3 represented by Waverly David Crenshaw, Jr. (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED represented by Waverly David Crenshaw, Jr. (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED represented by Waverly David Crenshaw, Jr. (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED represented by Waverly David Crenshaw, Jr. (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED represented by Waverly David Crenshaw, Jr. (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED represented by Waverly David Crenshaw, Jr. (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED represented by Waverly David Crenshaw, Jr. (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED represented by Waverly David Crenshaw, Jr. (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED represented by Waverly David Crenshaw, Jr. (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED represented by C. Geoffrey Weirich (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY As of 11 22 AM CDT 5 of 9 ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED Jason D. Fisher (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED Jennifer Lynn Kirk (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED Waverly David Crenshaw, Jr. (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED Date Filed # Docket Text 1 COMPLAINT (NO Summonses issued at this time/see cover letter for details) Filing fee paid in the amount of $150, Receipt (af) (Entered 2 NOTICE of ICMC set for 2 00 p.m. on before Judge Haynes (af) (Entered 3 ATTORNEY APPEARANCE for all defts by Waverly D. Crenshaw, Jr. of Waller, Lansden, Dortch &Davis, PLLC (af) (Entered 4 MOTION by pltfs for thirty day extension of time for initial case management conference (w/proposed order) (jb) (Entered 5 MOTION by pltfs for extension of time to file motion for class certification (jb) (Entered 6 ORDER by Judge William J. Haynes Jr. granting motion for thirty day extension of time for initial case management conference 4-1. EOD (cc all counsel) (gi) (Entered 7 ORDER by Judge William J. Haynes Jr. granting motion for extension of time until 120 days after the initial case management conference to file motion for class certification 5-1. EOD (cc all counsel) (gi) (Entered 8 MOTION by pltfs for attorneys David W. Sanford and Lisa A. Goldblatt to appear pro hac vice (certificates of good standing to be filed separately)(PHV fees paid) (gi) (Entered 10 CLERK'S RESUME ICMC held. Court will hold off on entering a CMO; pltf has 2 wks to decide if there is a need to file a motion; if not, pltf has until the end of Feb; both responses are due the end of March and replies a week thereafter. C/R Peggy Turner (hv) (Entered 9 ORDER by Judge William J. Haynes Jr. granting motion for attorneys David W. Sanford 8-1 and Lisa A. Goldblatt to appear pro hac vice 8-2 by pltfs. EOD (cc all counsel) (gi) (Entered 11 NOTICE by pltfs of filing certificates of good standing for Lisa Goldblatt and David Sanford (gi) (Entered 12 CERTIFICATE of Good Standing from USDC, District of MD, for David Weissbord Sanford filed by pltfs (gi) (Entered SECTION Case SECTION 3 As of 11 22 AM CDT 6 of 9 13 CERTIFICATE of Good Standing from USDC, District of MD, for Lisa Ann Goldblatt filed by pltfs (gi) (Entered 14 AMENDED COMPLAINT-CLASS ACTION 1-1 by pltfs terminating deft Cendant Corporation; jury demand (gi) (Entered 15 Joint MOTION for Settlement (Requesting Preliminary Approval of Proposed Consent Decree) by John Dave Labelle, Tim Hurley, Danny Higdon, Todd Griffin, Devon Boyd, Pat Doyle, Rob Crawford, Scott Roberson, James Graves, Ray Moore, Patricia Wilson, Mike Pierce, Mike Thompson, Daric Fail, Renita Chadwell, Teresa Faw, Tamara Pacwa, Shannon Matthews, George Chip Pennington, Cendant Corporation, Fairfield Resorts, Inc., Mickey Ruggiero. Responses due by (Attachments # 1 Exhibit 1 Proposed Court-Approved Consent Decree# 2 Exhibit 1A Important Notice of Class Action Settlement# 3 Exhibit 1B Type I Claim For Settlement Award From Fairfield Resorts# 4 Exhibit 1C Type II (Arbitration) Claim for Settlement Award from Fairfield Resorts# 5 Exhibit 1D Type I Full and Final Release of Claims# 6 Exhibit 1E Type II Full and Final Release of Claims# 7 Exhibit 1F-1 Release of Claims (Wilson)# 8 Exhibit 1F-2 Release of Claims (Chadwell)# 9 Exhibit 1F-3 Release of Claims (Faw)# 10 Exhibit 1F-4 Release of Claims (Pacwa)# 11 Exhibit 1F-5 Release of Claims (Matthews)# 12 Exhibit 1G Joint Stipulation of Dismissal with Prejudice# 13 Exhibit 2 Order Preliminarily Approving Proposed Consent Decree)(Crenshaw, Waverly) (Entered 16 ORDER preliminarily approving 15 proposed consent decree. Fairness hearing to be held on at 1 30. Any member of the settlement class may object to the proposed consent decree by filing an objection by Settlement class members who wish to exclude themselves from the settlement must do so in writing. Requests to opt out must be received by the Clerk of the USDC by Signed by Judge William J. Haynes on (gi, ) (Entered 17 Joint MOTION to Continue Fairness Hearing by John Dave Labelle, Tim Hurley, Danny Higdon, Todd Griffin, Devon Boyd, Pat Doyle, Rob Crawford, Scott Roberson, James Graves, Ray Moore, Patricia Wilson, Mike Pierce, Mike Thompson, Daric Fail, Renita Chadwell, Teresa Faw, Tamara Pacwa, Shannon Matthews, George Chip Pennington, Cendant Corporation, Fairfield Resorts, Inc., Mickey Ruggiero. Responses due by (Crenshaw, Waverly) (Entered 18 ORDER granting 17 Motion to Continue Fairness Hearing to at 1 30 pm counsel must provide prompt notice to the class of this resetting and provide a copy of such notice to the Court. Signed by Judge William J. Haynes on (hv) (Entered 19 NOTICE of Filing by John Dave Labelle, Tim Hurley, Danny Higdon, Todd Griffin, Devon Boyd, Pat Doyle, Rob Crawford, Scott Roberson, James Graves, Ray Moore, Patricia Wilson, Mike Pierce, Mike Thompson, Daric Fail, Renita Chadwell, Teresa Faw, Tamara Pacwa, Shannon Matthews, George Chip Pennington, Fairfield Resorts, Inc., Mickey Ruggiero of Amended Notice of Proposed Class Action Settlement and Fairness Hearing (Attachments # 1 Exhibit A (Amended Notice of Proposed Class Action Settlement and Fairness Hearing))(Crenshaw, Waverly) (Entered 20 Joint MOTION re 19 Notice (Other), Notice (Other), Notice (Other) Requesting the Court to Sign the Amended Version of the Notice of Proposed Class Action Settlement and Fairness Hearing SECTION Case SECTION 3 As of 11 22 AM CDT 7 of 9 by John Dave Labelle, Tim Hurley, Danny Higdon, Todd Griffin, Devon Boyd, Pat Doyle, Rob Crawford, Scott Roberson, James Graves, Ray Moore, Patricia Wilson, Mike Pierce, Mike Thompson, Daric Fail, Renita Chadwell, Teresa Faw, Tamara Pacwa, Shannon Matthews, George Chip Pennington, Cendant Corporation, Fairfield Resorts, Inc., Mickey Ruggiero. Responses due by (Crenshaw, Waverly) (Entered 21 MOTION Assign New Civil Action Number re 16 Order on Motion for Settlement, by George Chip Pennington. Responses due by (Goldblatt, Lisa) (Entered 22 AMENDED COMPLAINT against John Dave Labelle, Danny Higdon, Fairfield Resorts, Inc., filed by George Chip Pennington.(Goldblatt, Lisa) (Entered 23 ORDER denying 21 Motion for the Court to Order the Clerk of Court to assign a new civil action number to this severed case. The action shall remain as to this pltf under this case number. Signed by Judge William J. Haynes on (km, ) (Entered 25 Letter from Deborah Lormand re settlement. (gi, ) (Entered 26 Letter from Candy Ames re settlement. (gi, ) (Entered 24 ORDER granting 20 Motion requesting the Court to sign amended version of the notice of proposed class action settlement and fairness hearing. Signed by Judge William J. Haynes on (gi, ) (Entered 27 MOTION for attorney Geoffrey Weirich and Jennifer Kirk to Appear Pro Hac Vice by Fairfield Resorts, Inc.. Responses due by (PHV fees paid) (Crenshaw, Waverly) Modified on (gi, ). (Entered 28 CERTIFICATE OF GOOD STANDING filed by Fairfield Resorts, Inc.. (Crenshaw, Waverly) (Entered 29 CERTIFICATE OF GOOD STANDING filed by Fairfield Resorts, Inc.. (Crenshaw, Waverly) (Entered 30 STIPULATION of Dismissal by John Dave Labelle, George Chip Pennington, Fairfield Resorts, Inc.. (Crenshaw, Waverly) (Entered 31 ORDER granting 27 Motion for Geoffrey Weirich and Jennifer Kirk to Appear Pro Hac Vice. Signed by Judge William J. Haynes on (gi, ) (Entered 32 ORDER dismissing deft Franz Hanning; pltf to file a third amended complaint by defts shall have 10 days from the date of the filing of the amended complaint to file their answer. Signed by Judge William J. Haynes on (gi, ) (Entered 33 RECEIPT in the amount of for PHV fees for Attys Weirich &Kirk. (gi, ) (Entered 34 NOTICE of Filing by George Chip Pennington (Goldblatt, Lisa) (Entered 35 AMENDED COMPLAINT Third against Cendant Corp, Fairfield Resorts, Inc, John Dave Labelle, Danny Higdon, and Sharon Barnes, filed by George Chip Pennington.(Goldblatt, Lisa) Modified text on (gi, ). (Entered SECTION Case SECTION 3 As of 11 22 AM CDT 8 of 9 36 SECTION DefendantSECTION Sharon Barnes' ANSWER to Third Amended Complaint by Sharon Barnes.(Kirk, Jennifer) Modified Text on (jb). (Entered 37 SECTION DefendantSECTION Fairfield Resorts, Inc.'s ANSWER to Third Amended Complaint by Fairfield Resorts, Inc..(Kirk, Jennifer) Modified Text on (jb). (Entered 38 SECTION DefendantSECTION John Dave LaBelle's ANSWER to Third Amended Complaint by John Dave Labelle.(Kirk, Jennifer) Modified Text on (jb). (Entered 39 MEMORANDUM in Support of Final Approval of Consent Decree re 15 16 by Fairfield Resorts, Inc. (Kirk, Jennifer) Modified Text on (jb). (Entered 40 DECLARATION of Mark Patton filed by Fairfield Resorts, Inc.. (Kirk, Jennifer) (Entered 41 ORDER Granting 21 MOTION Assign New Civil Action Number re 16 Order on Motion for Settlement, filed by George Chip Pennington. Clerk shall transfer all filings involving the SECTION PlaintiffSECTION Pennington to a new case number. Signed by Judge William J. Haynes on (dt) (Entered 42 Minute Entry for proceedings held before Judge William J. Haynes Fairness Hearing held on Court given final approval of class action settlement. Preliminary approval made final. (Court Reporter Peggy Turner.) (jb) (Entered 43 COURT-APPROVED CONSENT DECREE This action is dismissed in its entirety, with prejudice. The Court shall retain jurisdiction over the Fairfield and the pltfs for purposes of such further orders as may be necessary to enforce or effecutuate this Consent Decree. See Consent Decree for more details. Signed by Judge William J. Haynes on (jb) (Entered 44 Docket entry number 43 is hereby entered on the docket in compliance with Rule 58 and/or Rule 79(a) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure on by JB. (jb) (Entered 45 Consent MOTION for Extension of Time to File Fee Application by Patricia Wilson, Renita Chadwell, Teresa Faw, Tamara Pacwa, Shannon Matthews. Responses due by (Sanford, David) (Entered 46 Consent MOTION for Attorney Fees by Patricia Wilson, Renita Chadwell, Teresa Faw, Tamara Pacwa, Shannon Matthews. Responses due by (Sanford, David) (Entered 47 MEMORANDUM in Support of 46 Consent MOTION for Attorney Fees filed by Patricia Wilson, Renita Chadwell, Teresa Faw, Tamara Pacwa, Shannon Matthews. (Attachments # 1 Exhibit Affidavit of David W. Sanford# 2 Exhibit Consent Decree# 3 Exhibit Calculation of Legal Fees# 4 Exhibit Calculation of Legal Fees)(Sanford, David) (Entered NOTE TO FILER RE DE #47, Exhibit 1 Signed affidavit should be filed as a separate event, not as an attachment; it is not necessary to refile this document. (gi, ) (Entered 48 ORDER granting 46 Motion for Attorney Fees. Signed by Judge William J. Haynes on (gi, ) (Entered 49 ORDER granting 45 Motion for Leave to file fee petition out of time for clarity of the record. Signed by Judge William J. Haynes on (gi, ) (Entered SECTION Case SECTION 3 As of 11 22 AM CDT 9 of 9 Summary: On January 22, 2004 a group of Fairfield Resorts employees filed this class action lawsuit against Cendant Corporation, Fairfield Resorts, and 15 individuals working at Fairfield Resorts in the U.S. District Court for the Middle District of Tennessee, Nashville Division. The plaintiffs were filing suit over alleged sexual harassment, gender discrimination, and retaliation they experienced on the job. On October 28, 2005, Judge William J. Haynes approved a consent decree granting monetary relief to plaintiffs and other female employees.

On January 22, 2004 a group of Fairfield Resorts employees filed this class action lawsuit against Cendant Corporation, Fairfield Resorts, and 15 individuals working at Fairfield Resorts in the U.S. District Court for the Middle District of Tennessee, Nashville Division. The plaintiffs were filing suit over alleged sexual harassment, gender discrimination, and retaliation they experienced on the job. On October 28, 2005, Judge William J. Haynes approved a consent decree granting monetary relief to plaintiffs and other female employees.

Using the provided source, generate a concise summary: SECTION SECTION Case SECTION 1 As of 08 36 PM EDT 1 of 18 U.S. District Court Western District of Pennsylvania (Erie) CIVIL DOCKET FOR CASE # 1 PECUNAS et al v. COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA Date Filed DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION et al Jury Demand SECTION DefendantSECTION Assigned to Judge Mark R. Hornak Nature of Suit 446 Civil Rights related SECTION Case SECTION 1 Americans with Disabilities - Other Cause 42 12101 The Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990 Jurisdiction Federal Question SECTION PlaintiffSECTION PAUL PECUNAS represented by Craig A. Markham Elderkin, Martin, Kelly & Messina 150 East Eighth Street Erie, PA (814) Fax (814) Email [email protected] ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED SECTION PlaintiffSECTION SHONA EAKIN represented by Craig A. Markham (See above for address) ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED SECTION PlaintiffSECTION MARK ZAHAR represented by Craig A. Markham (See above for address) ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED SECTION PlaintiffSECTION VOICES FOR INDEPENDENCE, (VFI) on behalf of themselves and all others similarly situated represented by Craig A. Markham (See above for address) ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED J. Mark Finnegan Heberle & Finnegan 2580 Craig Road Ann Arbor, MI 48103 (734) Email [email protected] ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED V. SECTION DefendantSECTION COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION SECTION DefendantSECTION ALLEN D. BIEHLER P.E., in his official capacity as Secretary of Transportation of the Commonwealth represented by Scott A. Bradley Office of the Attorney General 564 Forbes Avenue 6th Floor, Manor Complex Pittsburgh, PA 15219 (412) Email [email protected] LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED represented by Scott A. Bradley (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY SECTION Case SECTION 1 As of 08 36 PM EDT 2 of 18 of Pennsylvania ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED SECTION DefendantSECTION MILLCREEK TOWNSHIP, PA represented by Marissa Savastana Watts MacDonald, Illig, Jones & Britton 100 State Street Suite 700 Erie, PA (814) Email [email protected] TERMINATED LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED Mark T. Pavkov MacDonald, Illig, Jones & Britton, LLP 100 State Street Suite 700 Erie, PA Fax Email [email protected] ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED Mark J. Shaw MacDonald, Illig, Jones & Britton 100 State Street Suite 700 Erie, PA (814) Email [email protected] ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED Cross Claimant MILLCREEK TOWNSHIP, PA represented by Marissa Savastana Watts (See above for address) TERMINATED LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED Mark T. Pavkov (See above for address) ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED Mark J. Shaw (See above for address) ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED V. Cross SECTION DefendantSECTION COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION represented by Scott A. Bradley (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED Date Filed # Docket Text 1 COMPLAINT against All SECTION DefendantSECTION s (Filing fee $350, receipt number filed by PAUL PECUNAS, SHONA EAKIN, VOICES FOR INDEPENDENCE, (VFI), MARK ZAHAR. (Attachments # 1 Exhibit, # 2 Civil Cover Sheet) (sdp) (Entered SECTION Case SECTION 1 As of 08 36 PM EDT 3 of 18 Summons Issued as to * All SECTION DefendantSECTION s * (sdp) (Entered 2 AFFIDAVIT of Service for complaint and summons served on Millcreek Twp.-receptionist on filed by PAUL PECUNAS, SHONA EAKIN, VOICES FOR INDEPENDENCE, (VFI), MARK ZAHAR., SUMMONS/Return of Service Returned Executed by PAUL PECUNAS, SHONA EAKIN, VOICES FOR INDEPENDENCE, (VFI), MARK ZAHAR. MILLCREEK TOWNSHIP, PA served on answer due (Markham, Craig) (Entered 3 NOTICE of Appearance by Scott A. Bradley on behalf of ALLEN D. BIEHLER, COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION. (Bradley, Scott) (Entered 4 NOTICE of Appearance by J. Mark Finnegan on behalf of VOICES FOR INDEPENDENCE, (VFI). (Finnegan, J.) (Entered 5 AFFIDAVIT of Service of summons and complaint, filed by PAUL PECUNAS, SHONA EAKIN, VOICES FOR INDEPENDENCE, (VFI), MARK ZAHAR., SUMMONS/Return of Service Returned Executed by PAUL PECUNAS, SHONA EAKIN, VOICE Summary: Plaintiffs filed a suit in federal court on January 20, 2011, against Millcreek Township, PA and the Pennsylvania Department of Transportation (PennDOT). Plaintiffs alleged that the sidewalks and intersections in Millcreek were not in compliance with the disability accessibility mandates of the Americans with Disabilities Act and Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act, and sought injunctive and declaratory relief, and attorneys' fees. On November 23, 2016, the parties partially settled, with the Township and PennDOT committing to adhere to ADA requirements in the future and to retrofit sidewalks and intersections where necessary. A series of consent decrees, over which the court retains jurisdiction, have been entered and the case is ongoing.

Plaintiffs filed a suit in federal court on January 20, 2011, against Millcreek Township, PA and the Pennsylvania Department of Transportation (PennDOT). Plaintiffs alleged that the sidewalks and intersections in Millcreek were not in compliance with the disability accessibility mandates of the Americans with Disabilities Act and Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act, and sought injunctive and declaratory relief, and attorneys' fees. On November 23, 2016, the parties partially settled, with the Township and PennDOT committing to adhere to ADA requirements in the future and to retrofit sidewalks and intersections where necessary. A series of consent decrees, over which the court retains jurisdiction, have been entered and the case is ongoing.

Using the provided source, generate a concise summary: SECTION SECTION Case SECTION 6 As of 10 24 AM EDT 1 of 12 U.S. DISTRICT COURT U.S. District Court, Western District of New York (Rochester) CIVIL DOCKET FOR CASE # 6 Equal Employment Opportunity Commission v. Nichols Gas and Date Filed Oil, Inc. Date Terminated Assigned to Hon. Charles J. Siragusa Jury Demand SECTION PlaintiffSECTION Referred to Hon. Marian W. Payson Nature of Suit 442 Civil Rights Jobs Cause 42 2000 Job Discrimination (Sex) Jurisdiction U.S. Government SECTION PlaintiffSECTION SECTION PlaintiffSECTION Equal Employment Opportunity Commission represented by Nora E. Curtin U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission New York District Office 33 Whitehall Street 5th Floor New York, NY Fax Email [email protected] LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED Delia Dianna Cadle Equal Employment Opportunity Commission 6 Fountain Plaza, Suite 350 Buffalo, NY 14202 Fax Email [email protected] TERMINATED Judith Ann Biltekoff Equal Employment Opportunity Commission 6 Fountain Plaza, Suite 350 Buffalo, NY 14202 Fax Email [email protected] ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED V. SECTION DefendantSECTION Nichols Gas and Oil, Inc. represented by Elizabeth A. Cordello Underberg & Kessler LLP 300 Bausch & Lomb Place Rochester, NY 14604 Fax Email [email protected] LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED Paul F. Keneally Underberg & Kessler LLP 300 Bausch & Lomb Place Rochester, NY 14604 SECTION Case SECTION 6 As of 10 24 AM EDT 2 of 12 Fax Email [email protected] LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED R. Scott DeLuca Schrader, Israely, DeLuca LLP 2635 Millersport Highway Suite 200 Getzville, NY 14068 Fax Email [email protected] TERMINATED SECTION DefendantSECTION Townsend Oil Corporation d/b/a Townsend Oil & Propane represented by James Scott Wolford The Wolford Law Firm LLP 16 East Main Street 600 Reynolds Arcade Building Rochester, NY 14614 Fax Email [email protected] LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED Michael R. Wolford The Wolford Law Firm LLP 16 East Main Street 600 Reynolds Arcade Building Rochester, NY 14614 Fax Email [email protected] LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED Jennifer L. Wang The Wolford Law Firm LLP 16 East Main Street 600 Reynolds Arcade Building Rochester, NY 14614 Fax Email [email protected] ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED Cross Claimant Townsend Oil Corporation d/b/a Townsend Oil & Propane represented by James Scott Wolford (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED Michael R. Wolford (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED V. Cross SECTION DefendantSECTION SECTION Case SECTION 6 As of 10 24 AM EDT 3 of 12 Nichols Gas and Oil, Inc. represented by Paul F. Keneally (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED R. Scott DeLuca (See above for address) TERMINATED LEAD ATTORNEY Date Filed # Docket Text 1 COMPLAINT against Nichols Gas and Oil, Inc., filed by Equal Employment Opportunity Commission.(TO, ) (Entered Summons Issued as to Nichols Gas and Oil, Inc.. (TO, ) (Entered 2 MOTION to Dismiss Portions of SECTION PlaintiffSECTION's Complaint, MOTION for More Definite Statement by Nichols Gas and Oil, Inc..(DeLuca, R. Scott) (Entered 3 AFFIDAVIT in Support re 2 MOTION to Dismiss Portions of SECTION PlaintiffSECTION's Complaint MOTION for More Definite Statement Attorney Affidavit in Support of SECTION DefendantSECTION's Motion filed by Nichols Gas and Oil, Inc.. (Attachments # 1 Exhibit A)(DeLuca, R. Scott) (Entered 4 MEMORANDUM in Support re 2 MOTION to Dismiss Portions of SECTION PlaintiffSECTION's Complaint MOTION for More Definite Statement filed by Nichols Gas and Oil, Inc.. (DeLuca, R. Scott) (Entered 5 MOTION SCHEDULING ORDER re 2 MOTION to Dismiss Portions of SECTION PlaintiffSECTION's Complaint MOTION for More Definite Statement filed by Nichols Gas and Oil, Inc. Signed by Hon. Charles J. Siragusa on (KAR, ) (Entered Set Deadlines/Hearings Responses due by Replies due by Motion Hearing set for 03 30 PM before Hon. Charl Summary: In 2005, the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) brought suit against Nichols Gas and Oil, Inc. (Nicholas) and Townsend Oil Corporation (Townsend) in the U.S. District Court for the Western District of New York. The complaint alleged discrimination based on sex, female, in violation of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. The case ended in and court approved consent decree granting monetary and injunctive relief.

In 2005, the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) brought suit against Nichols Gas and Oil, Inc. (Nicholas) and Townsend Oil Corporation (Townsend) in the U.S. District Court for the Western District of New York. The complaint alleged discrimination based on sex, female, in violation of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. The case ended in and court approved consent decree granting monetary and injunctive relief.

Using the provided source, generate a concise summary: SECTION U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission PRESS RELEASE Dynamic Medical Services To Pay To Settle EEOC Religious Discrimination Lawsuit Company Required Employees to Participate in Scientology Religious Practices, Fired Two for Refusing, Federal Agency Charged MIAMI - Dynamic Medical Services, Inc., a Miami companyowned byDr. Dennis Nobbe which provides medical and chiropractic services, has agreed to settle a religious discrimin​ation lawsuit filed bythe U.S. Equal Employment OpportunityCommission (EEOC), the agencyannounced today. The EEOC charged in its suit that Dynamic Medical Services, Inc. ( DMS ) required Norma Rodriguez, Maykel Ruz, RommySanchez, Yanileydis Capote and other employees to spend at least half their work days in courses that involved Scientologyreligious practices, such as screaming at ashtrays or staring at someone for eight hours without moving. The companyalso instructed employees to attend courses at the Church of Scientology. Additionally, the company required Sanchezto undergo an audit byconnect​ing herself to an E-meter, which Scientologists believe is a religious artifact, and required her to undergo purification treatment at the Church of Scientology. According to the EEOC's suit, employees repeatedlyasked not to attend the courses but were told it was a requirement of the job. In the cases of Rodriguezand Sanchez, when theyrefused to participate in Scientology religious practices and/or did not conform to Scientologyreligious beliefs, theywere terminated. Such alleged practices violate Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, which prohibits discrimination on the basis of religion-which includes forcing employees to conform to a particular religion. The EEOC filed suit (Case No. 1 filed in U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Florida) after first attempting to reach a settlement through its conciliation process. According to the terms of the consent decree, which was approved bythe U.S. District Court on December 23, 2013, DMS will to settle the lawsuit. Payments will be made to the four named claimants Rodriguez, Ruz, Sanchez, Capote, and four other identified class members. The agreement also requires DMS to accommodate employees who complain about attending and/or participating in religious courses or other religious work-related activities for religious reasons; to notifyEEOC if employees request a religious accommodation; to adopt an anti-discrimination policythat explains to employees their rights under Title VII with respect to religious discrimination; and to conduct training for DMS employees covering Title VII, and specificallyfocusing on religious discrimination. We are pleased that we have been able to secure relief for all claimants and class members, and to ensure that policies are in place to prevent religious discrimination at DMS, said Robert Weisberg, regional attorneyfor the EEOC's Miami District. The law is clear An employer cannot force his or her religion on staff bymandating that employees practice or espouse a certain religion, and cannot refuse to accommodate employees after theyobject to such discriminatory employment practices. Malcolm Medley, director of the EEOC's Miami District, added, I am proud of the work our investigators and legal team did in this case. Employers cannot make participation in religious practices a mandatorycondition of employment. Moreover, employees who object to such mandatorypractices and request an accommodation cannot be in fear of retaliation. The EEOC is responsible for enforcing federal laws against employment discrimination. The Miami District Office's jurisdiction includes Florida, Puerto Rico and U.S. Virgin Islands. Further information is available at www.eeoc.gov. Summary: On May 8, 2013, the EEOC filed suit in U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Florida under 42 U.S.C. § 1981 and 42 U.S.C. § 2000 against Dynamic Medical Services, Inc., on behalf of several sales employees. Plaintiffs alleged that they were coerced into adopting Scientology religious views and practices. In December of 2013, the case was settled for and a series of anti-discrimination measures on the part of Dynamic.

On May 8, 2013, the EEOC filed suit in U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Florida under 42 U.S.C. § 1981 and 42 U.S.C. § 2000 against Dynamic Medical Services, Inc., on behalf of several sales employees. Plaintiffs alleged that they were coerced into adopting Scientology religious views and practices. In December of 2013, the case was settled for and a series of anti-discrimination measures on the part of Dynamic.

Using the provided source, generate a concise summary: SECTION United States Court of Appeals FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT _______________ No. _______________ Terrick Terrell Nooner, * * Appellant, * * Don William Davis; * Jack Harold Jones, Jr., * * Intervenor SECTION PlaintiffSECTION s-Appellants, * * v. * * Larry Norris, in his official capacity * as Director, Arkansas Department of * Correction; Gaylon Lay, in his official * capacity as Warden, Arkansas * Department of Correction, Cummins * Unit; Wendy Kelly, in her official * capacity as Deputy Director for Health * and Correctional Programs, Arkansas * Department of Correction; John Byus, * in his official capacity as Administrator, * Correctional Medical Services, * Arkansas Department of Correction; * Does, 1-50, unknown executioners, * in their official capacities as employees * and/or agents of the Arkansas * Department of Correction, * * Appellees, * ------------------------------ Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Arkansas. Frank Williams, Jr., * * Appellant, * * v. * * Larry Norris, in his official capacity * as Director, Arkansas Department of * Correction; Gaylon Lay, in his official * capacity as Warden, Arkansas * Department of Correction, Cummins * Unit; Wendy Kelly, in her official * capacity as Deputy Director for Health * and Correctional Programs, Arkansas * Department of Correction; John Byus, * in his official capacity as Administrator, * Correctional Medical Services, * Arkansas Department of Correction; * Does, 1-50, unknown executioners, * in their official capacities as employees * and/or agents of the Arkansas * Department of Correction, * * Appellees. * ___________ Submitted September 24, 2009 Filed February 8, 2010 ___________ Before MELLOY, GRUENDER and BENTON, Circuit Judges. ___________ GRUENDER, Circuit Judge. Terrick Terrell Nooner, Don William Davis, Jack Harold Jones and Frank Williams, Jr. (collectively, “the Inmates”) were each convicted of capital murder in -2- Arkansas. Their convictions have been affirmed, their petitions for post-conviction relief have been denied, and they await execution by the State of Arkansas. In this 42 U.S.C. § 1983 lawsuit against Larry Norris, Director of the Arkansas Department of Correction, and other corrections employees (collectively, “the ADC”), the Inmates challenge the constitutionality of Arkansas’s protocol for execution by lethal injection. The district court1 granted the ADC’s motion for summary judgment, and the Inmates now appeal. For the following reasons, we affirm. I. BACKGROUND Nooner filed his lawsuit on May 1, 2006. Davis a nd Jones filed m otions to intervene as party plaintiffs, which the district court granted on May 26, 2006, and December 1, 2006, respectively. On August 9, 2007, the district court ordered the case consolidated with a similar lawsuit filed by Williams on July 11, 2007. On June 26, 2006, the district court granted Davis a prelim inary injunction, staying his execution. The ADC appealed, and on July 9, 2007, we vacated the preliminary injunction and stay of execution. Nooner v. Norris, 491 F.3d 804, 806 (8th Cir. 2007). The next day, the Inmates sought discovery for the first time by filing a motion for expedited discovery. The district court denied the Inmates’ motion for expedited discovery on August 9, 2007, butthe ADC nevertheless produced more than 300 pages of docum ents in response. The ADC moved for sum mary judgment, arguing that the Inmates had failed to establish a genuine issue of material fact about the constitutionality of Arkansas’s lethal injection protocol. The Inm ates sought shelter under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 56(f), claiming that they lacked access to the facts necessary to oppose the ADC’s motion for summary judgment and that they needed further discovery. 1The Honorable Susan Webber Wright, Un ited States District Judge for the Eastern District of Arkansas. -3- Before the district court ruled on the ADC’s motion for summary judgment, the Supreme Court granted c Summary: A prisoner facing the death penalty in Arkansas sued over the form of lethal injection used by the state. The case was dismissed because of a lack of evidence that Arkansas's use of lethal injections subjected prisoners to a significant risk of pain. The case is closed, and one of the three plaintiffs was executed in 2017.

A prisoner facing the death penalty in Arkansas sued over the form of lethal injection used by the state. The case was dismissed because of a lack of evidence that Arkansas's use of lethal injections subjected prisoners to a significant risk of pain. The case is closed, and one of the three plaintiffs was executed in 2017.

Using the provided source, generate a concise summary: SECTION SECTION Case SECTION 2 As of 03 15 PM CDT 1 of 12 U.S. District Court Western District of Tennessee (Memphis) CIVIL DOCKET FOR CASE # 2 CLOSED Equal Employment Opportunity Commission v. Paramount Staffing, Inc. Assigned to Judge Jon Phipps McCalla Referred to Magistrate Judge Charmiane G. Claxton Cause 42 2000e Job Discrimination (Employment) SECTION PlaintiffSECTION Date Filed Date Terminated Jury Demand SECTION PlaintiffSECTION Nature of Suit 442 Civil Rights Jobs Jurisdiction U.S. Government SECTION PlaintiffSECTION Equal Employment Opportunity Commission represented by Deidre Smith BREWER & BARLOW PLC 1755 Kirby Parkway Suite 110 Memphis, TN 38120 Fax Email [email protected] LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED Faye A. Williams EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY COMMISSION- Memphis 1407 Union Avenue Ste. 901 Memphis, TN 38104 Email [email protected] LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED Gwendolyn Young Reams EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY COMMISSION- Memphis 1407 Union Avenue Ste. 901 Memphis, TN 38104 LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED James Lee EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY COMMISSION- Memphis 1407 Union Avenue Ste. 901 Memphis, TN 38104 LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED Ronald S. Cooper EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY COMMISSION- Memphis 1407 Union Avenue Ste. 901 SECTION Case SECTION 2 As of 03 15 PM CDT 2 of 12 Memphis, TN 38104 LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED Steven W. Dills EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY COMMISSION 1407 Union Avenue Suite 901 Memphis, TN 38104 Fax Email [email protected] LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED Terry L. Beck EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY COMMISSION- Memphis 1407 Union Avenue Ste. 901 Memphis, TN 38104 Fax TERMINATED LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED Johnnie L. Johnson, III EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY COMMISSION 1407 Union Avenue Ste. 621 Memphis, TN 38104 Fax Email [email protected] TERMINATED ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED Sally Ramsey CONSTANGY BROOKS & SMITH, LLP - Nashville Suntrust Plaza 401 Commerce Street Suite 1010 Nashville, TN 37219 Fax Email [email protected] ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED V. SECTION DefendantSECTION Paramount Staffing, Inc. represented by Paul E. Prather LITTLER MENDELSON, PLC 3725 Champion Hills Drive Suite 3000 Memphis, TN 38125 Fax SECTION Case SECTION 2 As of 03 15 PM CDT 3 of 12 Email [email protected] LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED Brenda Nelson Canale LITTLER MENDELSON, PLC 3725 Champion Hills Drive Suite 3000 Memphis, TN 38125 Fax Email [email protected] ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED George W. Loveland, II LITTLER MENDELSON, PLC 3725 Champion Hills Drive Suite 3000 Memphis, TN 38125 Fax Email [email protected] ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED Steven Hymowitz KIESEWETTER WISE KAPLAN & PRATHER, PLC 3725 Champion Hills Drive Ste. 3000 Memphis, TN 38125 Fax Email [email protected] ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED Sylvia R. Adams KIESEWETTER WISE KAPLAN & PRATHER, PLC 3725 Champion Hills Drive Ste. 3000 Memphis, TN 38125 Fax Email [email protected] TERMINATED ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED Date Filed # Docket Text 1 COMPLAINT against Paramount Staffing, Inc. (Filing fee waived), filed by Equal Employment Opportunity Commission. (Attachments # 1 Civil Cover Sheet)(cas) (Entered 2 ANSWER to Complaint by Paramount Staffing, Inc..(Prather, Paul) (Entered 3 NOTICE of Appearance by Johnnie L. Johnson, III on behalf of Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (Johnson, Johnnie) (Entered 4 Notice of Correction to 3 Notice of Appearance to correct inadvertent omission of Terry Beck. (Attachments # 1 Corrected Notice of Appearance)(Johnson, Johnnie) (Entered 5 SETTING LETTER Scheduling Conference set for 09 30 AM in Courtroom 5 - Memphis before Judge Jon Phipps McCalla. Please email the proposed SECTION Case SECTION 2 As of 03 15 PM CDT 4 of 12 joint scheduling order to [email protected] by Tuesday, February 20, 2007. If the order is approved and filed, the conference will be canceled.Please see Judge Vescovo's Rule 16(b) instr Summary: The Memphis Office of the EEOC brought this suit against Paramount Staffing, Inc. in September 2006 in the United States District Court for the Western District of Tennessee (Memphis). The complaint alleged discrimination and retaliation based on race (African American) and national origin (American). The parties settled out of court on a two-year consent decree.

The Memphis Office of the EEOC brought this suit against Paramount Staffing, Inc. in September 2006 in the United States District Court for the Western District of Tennessee (Memphis). The complaint alleged discrimination and retaliation based on race (African American) and national origin (American). The parties settled out of court on a two-year consent decree.

Using the provided source, generate a concise summary: SECTION SECTION Case SECTION 6 As of 12 40 PM EDT 1 of 45 APPEAL, CONSENT, JWF U.S. DISTRICT COURT U.S. District Court, Western District of New York (Rochester) CIVIL DOCKET FOR CASE # 6 Davis v. Eastman Kodak Co. Assigned to Hon. Jonathan W. Feldman Demand Cause 42 1981 Job Discrimination (Race) SECTION PlaintiffSECTION Courtney Davis Date Filed Date Terminated Jury Demand SECTION PlaintiffSECTION Nature of Suit 442 Civil Rights Jobs Jurisdiction Federal Question represented by Andrew E. Aubertine Aubertine Law Firm 1211 SW 6th Avenue Portland, OR 97204 (503) LEAD ATTORNEY PRO HAC VICE ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED Bruce E. Gerstein Garwin, Gerstein &Fisher, LLP 1501 Broadway Room 1416 New York, NY 10036 Fax Email [email protected] LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED Clayborne E. Chavers Joseph Greenwald &Laake 6404 Ivy Lane Suite 400 Greenbelt, MD 20770 Fax LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED Ephraim R. Gerstein Garwin Gerstein &Fisher LLP 1501 Broadway Suite 1416 New York, NY 10036 (212) Fax LEAD ATTORNEY PRO HAC VICE ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED Judith Ann Biltekoff Brown &Kelly, LLP 1500 Liberty Building Buffalo, NY 14202 x 107 Fax Email [email protected] LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED SECTION Case SECTION 6 As of 12 40 PM EDT 2 of 45 Jules L. Smith Blitman &King The Powers Building 16 West Main Street Suite 207 Rochester, NY 14614 585 Fax Email [email protected] LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED Shanon J. Carson Berger &Montague, P.C. 1622 Locust Street Philadelphia, PA 19103 (215) Fax (215) Email [email protected] LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED William T. Coleman, III Berger &Montague, P.C. 1622 Locust Street Philadelphia, PA 19103 Fax Email [email protected] LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED Jan Bartelli Garwin, Gerstein &Fisher, LLP 1501 Broadway Room 1416 New York, NY 10036 Fax Email [email protected] TERMINATED Rebecca M. Hamburg Berger &Montague, P.C. 1622 Locust Street Philadelphia, PA 19103 (215) Fax Email [email protected] TERMINATED Selim Ablo Berger &Montague, P.C. 1622 Locust Street Philadelphia, PA 19103 Fax Email [email protected] TERMINATED Stephen A. Whinston Berger &Montague, P.C. 1622 Locust Street Philadelphia, PA 19103 SECTION Case SECTION 6 As of 12 40 PM EDT 3 of 45 Fax Email [email protected] TERMINATED William G. Bauer Woods Oviatt Gilman LLP 700 Crossroads Building Two State Street Rochester, NY 14614 (585) Fax (585) Email [email protected] TERMINATED SECTION PlaintiffSECTION Employees Committed for Justice represented by Andrew E. Aubertine (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY PRO HAC VICE ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED Bruce E. Gerstein (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED Clayborne E. Chavers (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED Ephraim R. Gerstein (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY PRO HAC VICE ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED Jules L. Smith (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED Shanon J. Carson (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED William T. Coleman, III (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED Jan Bartelli (See above for address) TERMINATED Judith Ann Biltekoff (See above for address) ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED Rebecca M. Hamburg (See above for address) TERMINATED SECTION Case SECTION 6 As of 12 40 PM EDT 4 of 45 Selim Ablo (See above for address) TERMINATED Stephen A. Whinston (See above for address) TERMINATED William G. Bauer (See above for address) TERMINATED SECTION PlaintiffSECTION Gladys Alston TERMINATED represented by Andrew E. Aubertine (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY PRO HAC VICE ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED Brett Cebulash, Esq. Garwin, Gerstein &Fisher, LLP 1501 Broadway Room 1416 New York, NY 10036 Fax Email [email protected] LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED Bruce E. Gerstein (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED Clayborne E. Chavers (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED Ephraim R. Gerstein Summary: This case was brought in 2004 by a class of plaintiffs (composed of nearly 1,000 black current and former employees of Kodak) against Eastman Kodak Co. in the U.S. District Court for the Western District of New York, alleging that Kodak engaged in an ongoing pattern or practice of racial discrimination against African-American employees. This case was settled in 2009 with Defendants agreeing to implement non-discriminatory employment practices and to pay damamges to the class.

This case was brought in 2004 by a class of plaintiffs (composed of nearly 1,000 black current and former employees of Kodak) against Eastman Kodak Co. in the U.S. District Court for the Western District of New York, alleging that Kodak engaged in an ongoing pattern or practice of racial discrimination against African-American employees. This case was settled in 2009 with Defendants agreeing to implement non-discriminatory employment practices and to pay damamges to the class.

Using the provided source, generate a concise summary: SECTION U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission PRESS RELEASE EEOC Sues Guardsmark for Retaliation Security Guard Fired for Opposing Sexual Harassment, Federal Agency Charged DETROIT - Security giant Guardsmark retaliated against a security guard who opposed a sexually hostile work environment by firing him, the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission alleged in a lawsuit filed today. The lawsuit alleges that Guardsmark terminated Christopher Smith in retaliation for his role in a woman's sexual harassment complaint. According to the lawsuit, another security guard used security cameras to zoom in on women's private parts. Smith told the security guard to stop, but the guard continued to engage in the behavior. Smith told a woman about the guard's actions, and the woman filed a sexual harassment complaint with the contractor for whom she worked. Guardsmark responded by firing Smith. Such alleged conduct violates Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, which prohibits retaliation. The EEOC filed suit (EEOC v. Guardsmark, Case No. 2 filed in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Michigan), after first attempting to settle the case through its conciliation process. The agency seeks to recover monetary compensation for Smith, including back pay and compensatory damages for emotional distress, as well as punitive damages. Title VII protects employees from being retaliated against for opposing sexual harassment even if they complain to someone else, like a co-worker or client, explained Nedra Campbell, trial attorney for the EEOC. Employees like Smith who oppose the illegal acts of a co-worker should be commended, not fired. Guardsmark provides security services to companies throughout the world. According to its website, www.guardsmark.com, Guardsmark, LLC, is one of the largest security firms in the world with over 19,000 employees and offices in more than 400 cities. Eliminating policies and practices that discourage or prohibit individuals from exercising their rights under employment discrimination statutes, or that impede the EEOC's investigative or enforcement efforts, is one of six national priorities identified by the EEOC's Strategic Enforcement Plan. The EEOC is responsible for enforcing federal laws prohibiting employment discrimination. Further information about the EEOC is available on its web site at www.eeoc.gov. Summary: In December 2013, the EEOC brought this suit against Guardsmark, LLC for discharging its employee who opposed sexually inappropriate conduct in the workplace. The parties entered a consent decree in September 2016, which provided Guardsmark would not retaliate against employees, would train employees on retaliation and sexual harassment, and Guardsmark would pay in monetary relief to plaintiff-intervenor. The case is now closed.

In December 2013, the EEOC brought this suit against Guardsmark, LLC for discharging its employee who opposed sexually inappropriate conduct in the workplace. The parties entered a consent decree in September 2016, which provided Guardsmark would not retaliate against employees, would train employees on retaliation and sexual harassment, and Guardsmark would pay in monetary relief to plaintiff-intervenor. The case is now closed.

Using the provided source, generate a concise summary: SECTION Case 2 Document 351 Filed Page 1 of 4 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF LOUISIANA ALANA CAIN, ET AL. CIVIL ACTION VERSUS NO. CITY OF NEW ORLEANS, ET AL. SECTION “R” (2) ORDER AND REASONS The Court has received plaintiffs’ motion for supplemental relief under 28 U.S.C. § 2202.1 SECTION PlaintiffSECTION s seek a “more specific declaratory SECTION DefendantSECTION s oppose the The Court previously granted in part plaintiffs’ motion for partial summary In that order, the Court found that “ p laintiffs are entitled summary judgment... to the extent they seek a declaration that the Judges’ practice of not inquiring into plaintiffs’ ability to pay before they are imprisoned for nonpayment violates the Fourteenth The Court stated that “the Judges must inquire into plaintiffs’ ability to pay before their imprisonment,” and “ t his inquiry must involve certain 1 R. Doc. 331. 2 See id. at 1. 3 R. Doc. 336. 4 See R. Doc. 279 at 1, 79. 5 See id. at 61. Case 2 Document 351 Filed Page 2 of 4 procedural safeguards, especially notice to the individual of the importance of ability to pay and an opportunity to be heard on the The Court also stated that “ i f an individual is unable to pay, then the Judges must consider alternative measures before imprisoning the Following this order, the Court entered a declaratory The judgment stated, in part, that “ t he undisputed evidence in this case establishes that the Judges have a policy or practice of not inquiring into criminal defendants’ ability to pay before those individuals are imprisoned for nonpayment of court It also stated that “ t he Fourteenth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution prohibits a state actor from arresting or detaining a criminal defendant solely for failure to pay a court-imposed debt absent a determination of ability to The Court then declared in part, “ c onsidering this law, the evidence in the record, and the Court’s orders and reasons on file herein,... that with respect to all persons who owe or will incur court debts arising from cases adjudicated in OPCDC, the Judges’ policy or practice of not inquiring into the ability to pay of such persons 6 Id. 7 Id. 8 R. Doc. 319. 9 Id. at 1. 10 Id. (citing Bearden v. Georgia, 461 U.S. 660 2 Case 2 Document 351 Filed Page 3 of 4 before they are imprisoned for nonpayment of court debts is Section 2202 provides that “ f urther necessary or proper relief based on a declaratory judgment or decree may be granted, after reasonable notice and hearing, against any adverse party whose rights have been determined by such judgment.” 28 U.S.C. § 2202; see also Heimann v. Nat’l Elevator Indus. Pension Fund, 187 F.3d 493, 510 (5th Cir. 1999) (“ A court has the power, upon a subsequent petition, to grant coercive or further declaratory relief in connection with a final declaratory judgment theretofore entered.”), overruled on other grounds by Arana v. Ochsner Health Plan, 338 F.3d 433, 440 n.11 (5th Cir. 2003). SECTION PlaintiffSECTION s request that the Court provide further relief based on its declaratory judgment by “clarify ing the Judges’ Specifically, they “ask this Court to decree it unconstitutional for any Orleans Parish Criminal District Court debtor to be imprisoned for willful nonpayment absent (1) a meaningful inquiry into the debtor’s ability to pay, preceded by notice of the importance of that issue and including an opportunity for the debtor to be heard on it, and (2) a finding that the debtor is able to The Court finds such relief appropriate here. 11 Id. at 2. 12 See R. Doc. 331-1 at 5. 13 R. Doc. 331. 3 Case 2 Document 351 Filed Page 4 of 4 The Court therefore GRANTS plaintiffs’ motion. The Court DECLARES it unconstitutional for any Orleans Parish Criminal District Court criminal defendant to be imprisoned for willful nonpayment of fines, fees, or restitution imposed on the criminal defendant by OPCDC absent (1) a meaningful inquiry into the criminal defendant’s ability to pay, preceded by notice of the importance of that issue and including an opportunity for the criminal defendant to be heard on it, and (2) a finding that the criminal defendant is able to pay. New Orleans, Louisiana, this day of March, 2020. _____________________ SARAH S. VANCE UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE 4 Summary: In 2015, indigent former criminal defendants filed this putative class action lawsuit in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Louisiana. Plaintiffs alleged that that the defendants had a practice of imprisoning individuals who had failed to pay court debts without meaningfully determining whether the individuals had the ability to pay the debt. In August 2018, granted plaintiffs’ motion for class certification, and held that the Judges’ policy/practice of not inquiring into the ability of the persons falling within the certified class to pay before they are imprisoned for non-payment of court debts was unconstitutional, and that the Judges’ failure to provide a neutral forum for determination of such persons’ ability to pay was unconstitutional. The defendants appealed to the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals. The Fifth Circuit affirmed the lower court on August 23, 2019. The defendants petitioned the Fifth Circuit to rehear the case en banc on September 6, 2019, but the court denied to rehear on September 30. The defendants filed a petition for writ of certiorari in the U.S. Supreme Court on December 20, 2019. Cert was denied on March 3, 2020.

In 2015, indigent former criminal defendants filed this putative class action lawsuit in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Louisiana. Plaintiffs alleged that that the defendants had a practice of imprisoning individuals who had failed to pay court debts without meaningfully determining whether the individuals had the ability to pay the debt. In August 2018, granted plaintiffs’ motion for class certification, and held that the Judges’ policy/practice of not inquiring into the ability of the persons falling within the certified class to pay before they are imprisoned for non-payment of court debts was unconstitutional, and that the Judges’ failure to provide a neutral forum for determination of such persons’ ability to pay was unconstitutional. The defendants appealed to the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals. The Fifth Circuit affirmed the lower court on August 23, 2019. The defendants petitioned the Fifth Circuit to rehear the case en banc on September 6, 2019, but the court denied to rehear on September 30. The defendants filed a petition for writ of certiorari in the U.S. Supreme Court on December 20, 2019. Cert was denied on March 3, 2020.

Using the provided source, generate a concise summary: SECTION CLOSED, CONSOL U.S. District Court Northern District of Alabama (Eastern) CIVIL DOCKET FOR CASE # 1 Adams et al v. Tyson Foods, Inc. Assigned to Judge Karon O Bowdre Cause 42 2000 Job Discrimination (Race) SECTION PlaintiffSECTION United States Equal Employment Opportunity Commission TERMINATED SECTION PlaintiffSECTION Henry Adams Date Filed Date Terminated Jury Demand SECTION PlaintiffSECTION Nature of Suit 442 Civil Rights Jobs Jurisdiction Federal Question represented by George N Davies NAKAMURA QUINN &WALLS LLP Lakeshore Park Plaza 2204 Lakeshore Drive, Suite 130 Birmingham, AL Fax Email [email protected] TERMINATED LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED Kevin E Clark LIGHTFOOT FRANKLIN &WHITE LLC The Clark Building 400 20th Street, North Birmingham, AL 35203 Email [email protected] TERMINATED LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED represented by Adam T Stofsky LAWYERS COMMITTEE FOR CIVIL RIGHTS UNDER LAW 1401 New York Avenue NW, Suite 400 Washington, DC Fax Email [email protected] LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED Angeline Koo SHEARMAN &STERLING LLP 599 Lexington Avenue New York, NY 10022 Fax LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED Audrey J Wiggins LAWYERS COMMITTEE FOR CIVIL RIGHTS UNDER LAW 1401 New York Avenue NW, Suite 400 Washington, DC 20005 Fax Email [email protected] LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED George N Davies (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED Ivan E Lee SHEARMAN &STERLING LLP 599 Lexington Avenue New York, NY 10022 Fax LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED James Kim SHEARMAN &STERLING LLP 599 Lexington Avenue New York, NY 10022 Fax Email [email protected] LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED James P Tallon SHEARMAN &STERLING LLP 599 Lexington Avenue New York, NY 10022 Fax Email [email protected] LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED Kevin E Clark (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED Landan F Stewart SHEARMAN &STERLING LLP 599 Lexington Avenue New York, NY 10022 Fax LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED Nicole DeSario LAWYERS COMMITTEE FOR CIVIL RIGHTS UNDER LAW 1401 New York Avenue NW, Suite 400 Washington, DC 20005 Fax Email [email protected] LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED Brandy Reshaun Owens LIGHTFOOT FRANKLIN &WHITE LLC SECTION PlaintiffSECTION Letrek Beavers SECTION PlaintiffSECTION The Clark Building 400 20th Street North Birmingham, AL 35203 Fax Email [email protected] ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED represented by Adam T Stofsky (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED Angeline Koo (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED Audrey J Wiggins (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED George N Davies (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED Ivan E Lee (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED James Kim (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED James P Tallon (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED Kevin E Clark (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED Landan F Stewart (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED Nicole DeSario (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED Brandy Reshaun Owens (See above for address) ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED Avery Garrett SECTION PlaintiffSECTION Howard Garrett represented by Adam T Stofsky (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED Angeline Koo (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED Audrey J Wiggins (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED George N Davies (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED Ivan E Lee (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED James Kim (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED James P Tallon (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED Kevin E Clark (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED Landan F Stewart (See above fo Summary: In 2005, the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission filed a lawsuit in the Northern District of Alabama against Tyson Foods, Inc. Fourteen current and former African American employees at Tyson's Ashland, Alabama plant filed a lawsuit over the same issues, and the cases were consolidated. Plaintiffs claimed that Tyson had maintained racially segregated facilities and had subjected African American employees to a racially hostile work environment and retaliation and threats. On November 7, 2006, the parties settled and Plaintiffs received while Tyson was required to institute anti-discrimination policies and programs at its Ashland plant.

In 2005, the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission filed a lawsuit in the Northern District of Alabama against Tyson Foods, Inc. Fourteen current and former African American employees at Tyson's Ashland, Alabama plant filed a lawsuit over the same issues, and the cases were consolidated. Plaintiffs claimed that Tyson had maintained racially segregated facilities and had subjected African American employees to a racially hostile work environment and retaliation and threats. On November 7, 2006, the parties settled and Plaintiffs received while Tyson was required to institute anti-discrimination policies and programs at its Ashland plant.

Using the provided source, generate a concise summary: SECTION USDC ND/OK SECTION Case SECTION 4 As of 08 09 AM CDT Page 1 of 4 U.S. District Court U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Oklahoma (Tulsa) CIVIL DOCKET FOR CASE # 4 McCartney, et al v. Mayes Sch Dist 32, et al Assigned to Judge Michael Burrage Demand $0 Cause 28 1331 Federal Question Other Civil Rights SECTION PlaintiffSECTION Date Filed Date Terminated Jury Demand None Nature of Suit 440 Civil Rights Other Jurisdiction Federal Question Robert McCartney as parent and next friend of his daughter, Allison McCartney represented by Raymond L Yasser Smolen Smolen &Roytman PLLC 701 S CINCINNATI AVE TULSA, OK 74119 Fax Email [email protected] LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED Samuel J Schiller Schiller Law Firm 4113 Cumby Rd Ste 200 Cookeville, TN 38501 Fax Email [email protected] LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED SECTION PlaintiffSECTION Cheryl McCartney as parent and next friend of her minor daughter - Allison McCartney represented by Raymond L Yasser (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED Samuel J Schiller (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED SECTION PlaintiffSECTION Deborah Johnson as parent and next friend of her minor daughter, Rikkee Johnson represented by Raymond L Yasser (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED Samuel J Schiller (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED SECTION PlaintiffSECTION Michael Johnson as parent and next friend of his minor daughter - Rikkee Johnson represented by Raymond L Yasser (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED USDC ND/OK SECTION Case SECTION 4 As of 08 09 AM CDT Page 2 of 4 Samuel J Schiller (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED SECTION PlaintiffSECTION Daniel Jantz as parent and next friend of his minor daughter, Shelby Sheats represented by Raymond L Yasser (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED Samuel J Schiller (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED SECTION PlaintiffSECTION Kelly Jantz as parent and next friend of her minor daughter - Shelby Sheats represented by Raymond L Yasser (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED Samuel J Schiller (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED V. SECTION DefendantSECTION Independent School District No. 32 of Mayes County also known as Chouteau Public Schools SECTION DefendantSECTION John Phillips individually and in his official capacity as Superintendent SECTION DefendantSECTION John Doe Sued as Does 1 through 50 represented by Karen Lea Long Rosenstein Fist &Ringold 525 S MAIN STE 700 TULSA, OK 74103 Fax Email [email protected] LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED represented by Karen Lea Long (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED Date Filed # Docket Text 1 CLASS ACTION COMPLAINT (fee status pd) (fe, Dpty Clk) (Entered FILING FEE PAID IN FULL by plaintiffs on in the amount of $ 150.00 receipt # 87489 (fee status pd) (fe, Dpty Clk) (Entered 2 ATTORNEY APPEARANCE for plaintiffs by Samuel J Schiller (sac, Dpty Clk) (Entered USDC ND/OK SECTION Case SECTION 4 As of 08 09 AM CDT Page 3 of 4 3 ATTORNEY APPEARANCE for plaintiffs by Ray Yasser (sac, Dpty Clk) (Entered 4 ATTORNEY APPEARANCE for defendants Mayes Sch Dist 32 &John Phillips by Karen Lea Long (sac, Dpty Clk) (Entered 5 ANSWER by defendants Mayes Sch Dist 32 &defendant John Phillips to complt 1-1 (sac, Dpty Clk) (Entered MINUTE ORDER ; CASE MANAGEMENT CONF set for 11 15 a.m.,. Parties are directed to comply with the Local Rules of Court in regard to the submission of the Case Management Plan. (cc all counsel) (fe, Dpty Clk) (Entered 6 MOTION by plaintiffs to certify class action (o/j) (sac, Dpty Clk) (Entered 7 BRIEF by plaintiffs in support of their motion to certify class action 6-1 (sac, Dpty Clk) (Entered 8 CASE MANAGEMENT PLAN Received (sac, Dpty Clk) (Entered 9 ORDER by Judge Michael Burrage granting motion to certify class action 6-1 ; Pltfs need not provide any formal ntc to any members of the certified class (cc all counsel) (crp, Dpty Clk) (Entered 10 MINUTES by Judge Michael Burrage ; Case Management Conference held. Parties approve Order re Class Certification. Order signed. Schedo entered. Pltf's req/monthly status conf. denied at this time. If need arises, counsel to file a request. N/R (fe, Dpty Clk) (Entered 11 SCHEDULING ORDER Judge Michael Burrage motion filing ddl set for 3/6/00 discovery due proposed pretrial order due ; PRETRIAL CONF set for 10 00 ; TRIAL set for 9 30 ETT 8-10 days. Setcon to be set in Mar '00 and parties DO NOT consent to adjunct. cc counsel/MJ (fe, Dpty Clk) (Entered 12 ORDER by Magistrate Claire V. Eagan SETTLMT CONF set for 9 30 before Magistrate Claire V. Eagan (cc all counsel) (sjm, Dpty Clk) (Entered 13 FINAL WITNESS list by plaintiff Robert McCartney, plaintiff Cheryl McCartney, plaintiff Deborah Johnson, plaintiff Michael Johnson, plaintiff Daniel Jantz, plaintiff Kelly Jantz (fe, Dpty Clk) (Entered 14 WITNESS list by defendant Mayes Sch Dist 32, defendant John Phillips (sac, Dpty Clk) (Entered 15 MOTION by plaintiff Robert McCartney, plaintiff Cheryl McCartney, plaintiff Deborah Johnson, plaintiff Michael Johnson, plaintiff Daniel Jantz, plaintiff Kelly Jantz, defendant Mayes Sch Dist 32, defendant John Phillips, defendant John Doe to extend deadlines imposed by sched order (fe, Dpty Clk) (Entered 16 ORDER by Judge Michael Burrage granting joint motion to extend deadlines imposed by sched order 15-1 ; discovery ddl re set for motion filing ddl reset for pretrial order ddl reset for PRETRIAL CONF reset for 10 00 ; TRIAL reset for 9 30 before Judge Michael Burrage (see ord for further ddlns) (cc all counsel) (sac, Dpty Clk) (Entered 17 SETTLEMENT CONFERENCE REPORT by Magistrate Judge Claire V. Eagan advising litigation was settled, as soon as practicable parties shall file mtn to approve consent decree; Settlement Conference held (fe, Dpty Clk) (Entered 18 MINUTE ORDER by Judge Michael Burrage ; Due to Court conflict, PRETRIAL CONF, heretofore set is ADVANCED to 10 30 a.m., (cc all counsel) (fe, Dpty Clk) (Entered USDC ND/OK SECTION Case SECTION 4 As of 08 09 AM CDT Page 4 of 4 19 ADMINISTRATIVE Closing Order by Judge Michael Burrage (cc all counsel); Documents pending none (crp, Dpty Clk) (Entered 20 JOINT STIPULATION OF DISMISSAL AS TO DEFENDANT JOHN PHILLIPS, SUPERINTENDENT OF CHOUTEAU-MAZIE PUBLIC SCHOOLS (crp, Dpty Clk) (Entered 21 ORDER (SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT) by Judge Michael Burrage (cc all counsel) (sac, Dpty Clk) (Entered 22 STIPULATION OF DISMISSAL w/ prej by defendant John Phillips, defendant Mayes Sch Dist 32, plaintiff Kelly Jantz, plaintiff Daniel Jantz, plaintiff Michael Johnson, plaintiff Deborah Johnson, plaintiff Cheryl McCartney, plaintiff Robert McCartney; CASE DISMISSED (fe, Dpty Clk) (Entered Summary: Parents, on behalf of female students of Chouteau Public Schools, brought suit against the school district alleging that the school had violated female students' rights under the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment and Title IX of the Education Amendment through disparate treatment with respect to interscholastic athletics and programs. In a settlement agreement, the school district agreed to take steps to remedy the discriminatory actions by, among many things, providing coaching, facilities and equipment to both male and female athletic teams on a gender-neutral basis.

Parents, on behalf of female students of Chouteau Public Schools, brought suit against the school district alleging that the school had violated female students' rights under the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment and Title IX of the Education Amendment through disparate treatment with respect to interscholastic athletics and programs. In a settlement agreement, the school district agreed to take steps to remedy the discriminatory actions by, among many things, providing coaching, facilities and equipment to both male and female athletic teams on a gender-neutral basis.

Using the provided source, generate a concise summary: SECTION SECTION Case SECTION 1 As of 08 10 PM MST 1 of 42 NDISPO,TERMED U.S. District Court District of Colorado (Denver) CIVIL DOCKET FOR CASE # 1 Tomlinson et al v. El Paso Corporation et al Assigned to Judge Walker D. Miller Referred to Magistrate Judge Craig B. Shaffer Case in other court USCA, Cause 29 1001 E.R.I.S.A. Employee Retirement SECTION PlaintiffSECTION Date Filed Date Terminated Jury Demand SECTION PlaintiffSECTION Nature of Suit 791 Labor E.R.I.S.A. Jurisdiction Federal Question Wayne Tomlinson individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated represented by Barry Douglas Roseman McNamara Roseman &Shechter, LLP 1640 East 18th Avenue Denver, CO 80218 Fax Email LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED Stephen R. Bruce Stephen R. Bruce, Law Offices 805 15th Street, NW #210 Washington, DC 20005 Fax Email [email protected] LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED SECTION PlaintiffSECTION Alice Ballesteros individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated represented by Barry Douglas Roseman (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED Stephen R. Bruce (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED SECTION PlaintiffSECTION Gary Muckelroy individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated represented by Barry Douglas Roseman (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED Stephen R. Bruce (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED V. SECTION DefendantSECTION El Paso Corporation represented by Christopher James Rillo Schiff Hardin, LLP-San Francisco One Market, Spear Street Tower SECTION Case SECTION 1 As of 08 10 PM MST 2 of 42 Thirty-Second Floor San Francisco, CA 94105 Fax Email [email protected] LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED Raymond W. Martin Wheeler Trigg O'Donnell, LLP 370 17th Street Suite 4500 Denver, CO Fax Email [email protected] TERMINATED LEAD ATTORNEY Darren E. Nadel Littler Mendelson, PC-Denver 1900 16th Street Suite 800 Denver, CO 80202 Fax Email [email protected] Jill M. Brady Littler Mendelson, PC-Denver 1900 16th Street Suite 800 Denver, CO 80202 Fax Email [email protected] TERMINATED Joshua B. Kirkpatrick Littler Mendelson, PC-Denver 1900 16th Street Suite 800 Denver, CO 80202 Fax Email [email protected] Melissa Monheim Randall Littler Mendelson, PC-Denver 1900 16th Street Suite 800 Denver, CO 80202 Fax Email [email protected] TERMINATED SECTION DefendantSECTION El Paso Pension Plan represented by Christopher James Rillo (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED Raymond W. Martin SECTION Case SECTION 1 As of 08 10 PM MST 3 of 42 (See above for address) TERMINATED LEAD ATTORNEY Darren E. Nadel (See above for address) ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED Jill M. Brady (See above for address) TERMINATED Joshua B. Kirkpatrick (See above for address) ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED Melissa Monheim Randall (See above for address) TERMINATED Interested Party Mercer Human Resource Consulting, Inc. represented by Thomas J. Burke, Jr. Burke Law Firm, P.C. 1801 Broadway #1100 Denver, CO 80202 Fax Email [email protected] TERMINATED LEAD ATTORNEY Christopher Hulbert Toll Holland &Hart, LLP-Greenwood Village 6380 South Fiddlers Green Circle Suite 500 Greenwood Village, CO Fax Email [email protected] ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED Robyn A. Kashiwa Holland &Hart, LLP-Denver P.O. Box 8749 555 17th Street Suite 3200 Denver, CO Fax Email [email protected] ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED Date Filed # Docket Text 1 Class Action COMPLAINT against El Paso Corporation, El Paso Pension Plan (Filing fee $ 150 filed by plaintiffs Wayne Tomlinson, Alice Ballesteros, Gary Muckelroy. Jury demand.(bpm, ) (Entered Summons Issued as to El Paso Corporation, El Paso Pension Plan. (bpm, ) (Entered 2 ORDER returning case to clerk's office for reassignment to another judge. Signed by Judge Zita L. Weinshienk on (gms, ) (Entered SECTION Case SECTION 1 As of 08 10 PM MST 4 of 42 3 LETTER REASSIGNING CASE. Case reassigned Summary: This case was brought by employees of El Paso Corporation against their employer alleging violations of ERISA and the ADEA as a result of the conversion of their pension plans to a cash balance formula. However, the Tenth Circuit ruled that the defendant’s conversion to a cash balance plan was legal, as were the means the company utilized to transition to the new pension plan.

This case was brought by employees of El Paso Corporation against their employer alleging violations of ERISA and the ADEA as a result of the conversion of their pension plans to a cash balance formula. However, the Tenth Circuit ruled that the defendant’s conversion to a cash balance plan was legal, as were the means the company utilized to transition to the new pension plan.

Using the provided source, generate a concise summary: SECTION SECTION Case SECTION 3 As of 01 21 AM CDT 1 of 10 CLOSED,ECF,JURY U.S. District Court Northern District of Texas (Dallas) CIVIL DOCKET FOR CASE # 3 Woodall et al v. American Airlines Inc Assigned to Judge Barbara M.G. Lynn Cause Right to re-employment of inducted persons SECTION PlaintiffSECTION Date Filed Date Terminated Jury Demand Both Nature of Suit 442 Civil Rights Jobs Jurisdiction U.S. Government SECTION PlaintiffSECTION Mark Woodall represented by David J Palmer US Department of Justice Civil Rights Division 950 Pennsylvania Ave NW Room 4036 Washington, DC 20530 Fax LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED Bar Status Government Attorney Andrew Braniff US Department of Justice Civil Rights Division 950 Pennsylvania Ave NW Room 4036 Washington, DC 20530 Fax Email [email protected] ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED Bar Status Government Attorney Christine M Roth US Department of Justice Employment Litigation Section - PHB 950 Pennsylvania Ave NW Washington, DC 20530 Fax Email [email protected] TERMINATED Bar Status Government Attorney Esther G Tamburo US Department of Justice - Civil Rights Division Employment Litigation Section - PHB 950 Pennsylvania Ave NW Room 4036 Washington, DC 20530 Fax Email [email protected] ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED Bar Status Government Attorney John Cunningham US Department of Justice Employment Litigation Section - PHB 950 Pennsylvania Ave NW Washington, DC 20530 SECTION Case SECTION 3 As of 01 21 AM CDT 2 of 10 Fax Email ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED Bar Status Government Attorney John M Gadzichowski US Attorney's Office - Civil Rights Div/Emp Lit Section PO Box 65968 Washington, DC Bar Status Government Attorney Wan J Kim US Department of Justice Civil Rights Division 950 Pennsylvania Ave NW Room 4036 Washington, DC 20530 Fax Bar Status Government Attorney SECTION PlaintiffSECTION Michael P McMahon represented by David J Palmer (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED Bar Status Government Attorney Andrew Braniff (See above for address) ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED Bar Status Government Attorney Christine M Roth (See above for address) TERMINATED Bar Status Government Attorney Esther G Tamburo (See above for address) ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED Bar Status Government Attorney John Cunningham (See above for address) ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED Bar Status Government Attorney John M Gadzichowski (See above for address) Bar Status Government Attorney Wan J Kim (See above for address) Bar Status Government Attorney SECTION PlaintiffSECTION Paul J Madson Individually and on behalf of a class of all similarly situated persons represented by David J Palmer (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED Bar Status Government Attorney SECTION Case SECTION 3 As of 01 21 AM CDT 3 of 10 Andrew Braniff (See above for address) ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED Bar Status Government Attorney Christine M Roth (See above for address) TERMINATED Bar Status Government Attorney Esther G Tamburo (See above for address) ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED Bar Status Government Attorney John Cunningham (See above for address) ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED Bar Status Government Attorney John M Gadzichowski (See above for address) Bar Status Government Attorney Wan J Kim (See above for address) Bar Status Government Attorney V. SECTION DefendantSECTION American Airlines Inc represented by Ralph I Miller Weil Gotshal &Manges 200 Crescent Court Suite 300 Dallas, TX 75201 Fax FAX Email [email protected] LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED Bar Status Admitted/In Good Standing Erin Eckols Weil Gotshal &Manges 200 Crescent Court Suite 300 Dallas, TX 75201 Fax Bar Status Admitted/In Good Standing Margaret Hope Allen Weil Gotshal &Manges 200 Crescent Court Suite 300 Dallas, TX 75201 Fax Email [email protected] ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED Bar Status Admitted/In Good Standing Michelle LeGrand Hartmann SECTION Case SECTION 3 As of 01 21 AM CDT 4 of 10 Weil Gotshal &Manges 200 Crescent Court Suite 300 Dallas, TX 75201 Email [email protected] ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED Bar Status Admitted/In Good Standing Nicholas J Pappas Weil Gotshal &Manges LLP 767 Fifth Ave 29th Floor New York, NY 10153 Fax Email [email protected] Bar Status Not Admitted Date Filed # Docket Text 1 COMPLAINT against American Airlines Inc filed by Mark Woodall, Michael P McMahon, Paul J Madson. (govt, no fee) (cxb, ) (Entered ***Magistrate Judge Irma C. Ramirez chosen by random selection to handle matters that may be referred in this case. (nap, ) (Entered 2 CERTIFICATE OF INTERESTED PERSONS/DISCLOSURE STATEMENT by Mark Woodall, Michael P McMahon, Paul J Madson. (nap, ) (Entered 3 Unopposed Motion for Extension of Time to File Answer by American Airlines Inc (nap, ) (Entered 4 UNOPPOSED MOTION to Extend Time to Move for Class Certification Pursuant to Local Rule 23.2 by Mark Woodall, Michael P McMahon, Paul J Madson (nap, ) (Entered 5 ORDER granting 4 UNOPPOSED MOTION to Extend Time to Move for Class Certification Pursuant to Local Rule 23.2. Plts' motion for class certification shall be filed upon such date to be determined by this Court upon its review of the parties' proposed scheduling order. (Signed by Judge Barbara M. G. Lynn on (nap, ) (Entered 6 ORDER granting 3 Unopposed Motion for Extension of Time to File Answer re 1 Complaint. American Airlines Inc answer due See order for specifics. (Signed by Judge Barbara M. G. Lynn on (nap, ) (Entered 7 MOTION to Dismiss 1 Complaint, and, alternatively, MOTION to Strike by American Airlines Inc.. (mfw, ) (Entered 8 Brief in Support re 7 MOTION to Dismiss 1 Complaint, and, alternatively, MOTION to Strike filed by American Airlines Inc.. (mfw, ) (Entered 9 Appendix in Support re 7 MOTION to Dismiss 1 Complaint, and, alternatively, MOTION to Strike and Brief in Support Thereof filed by American Airlines Inc. (mfw, ) Additional attachment(s) added on (mfw, ). (Entered 10 RESPONSE in Opposition filed by Mark Woodall, Michael P McMahon, Paul J Madson re 7 MOTION for Dismissal of SECTION PlaintiffSECTION s' Complaint, and, Alternatively, MOTION to Strike 1 Complaint (jyg, ) (Entered 11 REPLY Brief in Support filed by American Airlines Inc re 7 MOTION for Dismissal of SECTION PlaintiffSECTION s' Complaint, and, Alternatively, MOTION to Strike 1 Complaint (jyg, ) (Entered SECTION Case SECTION 3 As of 01 21 AM CDT 5 of 10 12 Unopposed MOTION for Leave to File A Correction Page by Mark Woodall, Michael P McMahon, Paul J Madson (jyg, ) (Entered 13 Application and Order for Admission Pro Hac Vice by Nicholas J Pappas for American Airlines Inc (Signed by Judge Barbara M. G. Lynn on (nap, ) (Entered 14 Minute Entry for proceedings held before Judge Barbara M. G. Lynn Telephone Conference. The Court held a telephone conf. to advise the parties of a potential conflict of interest. The parties are directed to advise the Court within 5 business days whether such a conflict exists. (nap, ) (Entered 15 ORDER granting 12 Unopposed MOTION for Leave to File A Correction Page. See order for specifics. (Signed by Judge Barbara M. G. Lynn on (nap, ) (Entered 16 NOTICE by American Airlines Inc regarding potential conflict of interest (nap, ) (Entered 17 Order Designating Case for ECF - see order for specifics. (Signed by Judge Barbara M. G. Lynn on (axm, ) (Entered 18 Memorandum Opinion and Order denying 7 Motion to Dismiss and, Alternatively, to Strike filed by American Airlines Inc. SECTION PlaintiffSECTION s are granted leave to amend their Complaint concerning trip bidding so as to bring them in compliance with the pleading requirements of FRCvP SECTION PlaintiffSECTION s have until to amend their Trip Bidding Claim, properly to state a claim for injunctive relief, or to seek monetary damages via an avenue that does not require that SECTION PlaintiffSECTION s' claim for monetary relief be incidental to a claim for injunctive relief, as is required by Rule Failure to amend will result in the dismissal of SECTION PlaintiffSECTION's Trip Bidding Claim. All other relief not expressly granted herein is denied. (Signed by Judge Barbara M. G. Lynn on (kdc, ) Additional attachment(s) added on (kdc, ). (Entered 19 AMENDED COMPLAINT against American Airlines Inc filed by Mark Woodall, Michael P McMahon, Paul J Madson.(Cunningham, John) (Entered 20 Unopposed Motion for Extension of Time to File Answer, Move or Otherwise Respond to SECTION PlaintiffSECTION s' First Amended Complaint by American Airlines Inc (Attachments # 1 Proposed Order)(Hartmann, Michelle) (Entered 21 ORDER granting 20 Motion for Extension of Time to File Answer American Airlines Inc answer due (Signed by Judge Barbara M. G. Lynn on (jrb, ) (Entered 22 MOTION for Partial Dismissal of 19 Amended Complaint by American Airlines Inc (Hartmann, Michelle) Modified on (jrb, ). (Entered 23 Brief/Memorandum in Support filed by American Airlines Inc re 22 MOTION for Partial Dismiss re 19 Amended Complaint (Hartmann, Michelle) (Entered 24 Appendix in Support filed by American Airlines Inc re 22 MOTION for Partial Dismiss re 19 Amended Complaint (Attachments # 1 App. 1 - 40# 2 App. 41 - 80# 3 App. 81 - 119# 4 App. 120 - 158# 5 App. 159 - 198# 6 App. 199 - 239# 7 App. 240 - 277# 8 App. 278 - 308# 9 App. 309 - 352# 10 App. 353 - 388# 11 App. 389 - 435# 12 App. 436 - 483# 13 App. 484 - 521# 14 App. 522 - 563# 15 App. 564 - 595# 16 App. 596 - 636# 17 App. 637 - 679# 18 App. 680 - 703# 19 App. 704 - 733) (Hartmann, Michelle) (Entered 25 AMENDED COMPLAINT SECOND against American Airlines Inc filed by Mark Woodall, Michael P McMahon, Paul J Madson. (Cunningham, John) (Entered 26 RESPONSE in Opposition filed by Mark Woodall, Michael P McMahon, Paul J Madson re 22 MOTION for Partial Dismiss re 19 Amended Complaint (Cunningham, John) (Entered SECTION Case SECTION 3 As of 01 21 AM CDT 6 of 10 DEMAND for Trial by Jury by Mark Woodall, Michael P McMahon, Paul J Madson. See Second Amended Complaint. (jyg) (Entered 27 (LETTER) REPLY filed by American Airlines Inc re 22 MOTION for Partial Dismiss re 19 Amended Complaint (Miller, Ralph) Modified on (jb). (Entered 28 ORDER denying as moot 22 Motion for Partial Dismissal of SECTION PlaintiffSECTION s' Amended Complaint and SECTION PlaintiffSECTION s' Opposition thereto. Ordered that SECTION DefendantSECTION shall have 10 days from the date of this Order to answer SECTION PlaintiffSECTION s' Second Amended Complaint. (Signed by Judge Barbara M. G. Lynn on (jrb) (Entered 29 ANSWER to Amended Complaint / Answer and Affirmative Defenses to SECTION PlaintiffSECTION s' Second Amended Purported Class Action Complaint by American Airlines Inc (Hartmann, Michelle) (Entered 30 ORDER REQUIRING SCHEDULING CONFERENCE AND REPORT FOR CONTENTS OF SCHEDULING ORDER.Proposed Scheduling Order due by (Signed by Judge Barbara M. G. Lynn on (Attachments # 1 consent letter # form) (jrb) (Entered 31 Proposal for contents of scheduling and discovery order / Joint Report Regarding Contents of Scheduling Order by Mark Woodall, Michael P McMahon, Paul J Madson, American Airlines Inc. (Hartmann, Michelle) (Entered 32 NOTICE by Mark Woodall, Michael P McMahon, Paul J Madson, American Airlines Inc re 31 Proposed Scheduling and Discovery Order (Allen, Margaret) (Entered 33 Unopposed MOTION to Withdraw as Attorney Christine M. Roth by Mark Woodall, Michael P McMahon, Paul J Madson (Cunningham, John) (Entered 34 ORDER granting 33 SECTION PlaintiffSECTION s' Unopposed Motion for Withdrawal of Appearance Pursuant to Local Rule 83.12. The Clerk of the Court may remove Mrs. Roth's name from the docket and take any other appropriate action in accordance with this Order. (Signed by Judge Barbara M. G. Lynn on (klm) (Entered 35 SCHEDULING ORDER Discovery due by Pretrial Conference set for 09 00 AM before Judge Barbara M. G. Lynn. Jury Trial set on the Court's three-week docket for 09 00 AM before Judge Barbara M. G. Lynn. Proposed Pretrial Order due by Pretrial Materials due by Settlement Status Report due by Joinder of Parties No later than thirty (30) days following the Court's ruling on the Motion for Class Certification. Amendment of Pleadings No later than thirty (30) days following the Court's ruling on the Motion for Class Certification. Dispositive Motions All motions that would dispose of all or any part of this case, including motions for summary judgment, shall be filed no later than thirty (30) days after the close of merits-based discovery. (see order for specifics) (Signed by Judge Barbara M. G. Lynn on (lmp) Modified on (lmp). (Entered 36 Agreed Joint MOTION to Extend Time Deadlines in the Court's Scheduling Order by Mark Woodall, Michael P McMahon, Paul J Madson (Attachments # 1 Exhibit Proposed Amended Scheduling Order) (Cunningham, John) Modified on (lmp) (Entered 37 ORDER granting 36 Agreed Joint Motion to Extend Deadlines in the Court's Scheduling Order. (see order for specifics) (Signed by Judge Barbara M. G. Lynn on (klm) (Entered 38 STATUS REPORT Regarding Settlement Negotiations by Mark Woodall, Michael P McMahon, Paul J Madson, American Airlines Inc. (Cunningham, John) (Entered 39 STIPULATION by Mark Woodall, Michael P McMahon, Paul J Madson to Extend Expert Designation Deadlines in Court's Scheduling Order. (Cunningham, John) (Entered SECTION Case SECTION 3 As of 01 21 AM CDT 7 of 10 40 Second STIPULATION by Mark Woodall, Michael P McMahon, Paul J Madson, American Airlines Inc to Extend Expert Designation Deadlines in Court's Scheduling Order. (Cunningham, John) Modified on (klm). (Entered 41 Joint MOTION to Stay the Litigation and All Deadlines in the Court's Scheduling Order by Mark Woodall, Michael P McMahon, Paul J Madson, American Airlines Inc. (Cunningham, John) Modified on (tln). (Entered 42 ORDER granting 41 Agreed Joint Motion to Stay the Litigation and All Deadlines in the Court's Scheduling Order. (See Order for specifics) (Signed by Judge Barbara M. G. Lynn on (skt) (Entered 43 STATUS REPORT Letter re SECTION PlaintiffSECTION Paul Madson's Settlement Agreement by Mark Woodall, Michael P McMahon, Paul J Madson. (Cunningham, John) (Entered 44 Joint MOTION to Certify Class, Preliminarily Approve Settlement Agreement, and Approve Forms of Class Notice by Mark Woodall, Michael P McMahon, Paul J Madson with Brief/Memorandum in Support. (Cunningham, John) (Entered 45 Brief/Memorandum in Support filed by Mark Woodall, Michael P McMahon, Paul J Madson re 44 Joint MOTION to Certify Class, Preliminarily Approve Settlement Agreement, and Approve Forms of Class Notice (Cunningham, John) (Entered 46 Appendix in Support/Proposed Settlement Agreement filed by Mark Woodall, Michael P McMahon, Paul J Madson re 44 Joint MOTION to Certify Class, Preliminarily Approve Settlement Agreement, and Approve Forms of Class Notice, 45 Brief/Memorandum in Support of Motion Including Settlement Agreement and Exhibits (Cunningham, John) Modified on (npk). (Entered 47 Brief/Memorandum in Support filed by American Airlines Inc re 44 Joint MOTION to Certify Class, Preliminarily Approve Settlement Agreement, and Approve Forms of Class Notice (Miller, Ralph) (Entered 48 ORDER SETTING HEARING. A hearing on the 44 preliminary approval of a settlement agreement is hereby SET in this case for Tuesday, May 13, 2008, at 2 00 p.m. before Judge Barbara M. G. Lynn. (Signed by Judge Barbara M. G. Lynn on (tln) (Entered 49 SUPPLEMENTAL Memorandum of Law filed by American Airlines Inc re 44 Joint MOTION to Certify Class, Preliminarily Approve Settlement Agreement, and Approve Forms of Class Notice | (Allen, Margaret) Modified on (svc). (Entered 50 Appendix in Support filed by American Airlines Inc re 49 Brief/Memorandum in Support of Motion (Attachments # 1 App. 1-40, # 2 App. 41-79, # 3 App. # 4 App. # 5 App. # 6 App. # 7 App. # 8 App. # 9 App. # 10 App. # 11 App. (Allen, Margaret) (Entered 51 ORDER CONDITIONALLY CERTIFYING THE SETTLEMENT CLASS, PRELIMINARY APPROVING THE AGREEMENT, APPROVING FORMS OF CLASS NOTICE AND SCHEDULING A FAIRNESS HEARING The Fairness hearing will be held on at 9 00 AM. (See Order for specifics) (Signed by Judge Barbara M. G. Lynn on (skt) (Entered Set/Reset Hearings Fairness Hearing set for 09 00 AM before Judge Barbara M. G. Lynn. (skt) (Entered 52 Minute Entry for proceedings held before Judge Barbara M. G. Lynn Settlement Hearing held on Attorney Appearances SECTION PlaintiffSECTION - Counsel of record; Defense - Counsel of record. (Court Reporter Sue Engledow.) Time in Court 1 hr 20 min. (npk) (Entered SECTION Case SECTION 3 As of 01 21 AM CDT 8 of 10 53 Joint MOTION to Seal Document - File Paul J. Madson's Individual Confidential Settlement Agreement Under Seal filed by Mark Woodall, Michael P McMahon, Paul J Madson, American Airlines Inc (Attachments # 1 Text of Proposed Order) (Allen, Margaret) (Entered 54 ORDER granting 53 Joint Motion to File Paul J. Madson's Individual Confidential Settlement Agreement Under Seal. (Signed by Judge Barbara M. G. Lynn on (skt) (Entered 55 TRANSCRIPT of Preliminary Settlement Hearing Proceedings held on May 13, 2008 before Judge Barbara M.G. Lynn. Court Reporter/Transcriber P. Sue Engledow, Telephone number Parties are notified of their duty to review the transcript. A copy may be purchased from the court reporter or viewed at the clerk's office public terminal. If redaction is necessary, a Redaction Request - Transcript must be filed within 21 days. If no such Request is filed, the transcript will be made available via PACER without redaction after 90 calendar days. The clerk will mail a copy of this notice to parties not electronically noticed. Redaction Request due Redacted Transcript Deadline set for Release of Transcript Restriction set for (pse) (Entered 57 Joint MOTION Final Approval of the Settlement Agreement filed by Mark Woodall, Michael P McMahon, Paul J Madson (Cunningham, John) (Entered 58 Brief/Memorandum in Support filed by Mark Woodall, Michael P McMahon, Paul J Madson re 57 Joint MOTION Final Approval of the Settlement Agreement (Cunningham, John) (Entered 59 Appendix in Support filed by Mark Woodall, Michael P McMahon, Paul J Madson re 58 Brief/Memorandum in Support of Motion, 57 Joint MOTION Final Approval of the Settlement Agreement (Cunningham, John) (Entered 60 Brief/Memorandum in Support filed by American Airlines Inc re 57 Joint MOTION Final Approval of the Settlement Agreement and Response to Objections (Attachments # 1 Text of Proposed Order) (Hartmann, Michelle) (Entered 61 Appendix in Support filed by American Airlines Inc re 60 Brief/Memorandum in Support of Motion (Joint) for Final Approval of Settlement and Response to Objections (Hartmann, Michelle) (Entered 62 SUPPLEMENTAL MEMORANDUM in Further Support filed by American Airlines Inc re 57 Joint MOTION Final Approval of the Settlement Agreement (Supplemental Memorandum in Further Support) (Hartmann, Michelle) Modified on title (cxb). (Entered 63 Appendix in Support filed by American Airlines Inc re 62 Brief/Memorandum in Support of Motion (Supplemental) Memorandum in Further Support of Joint Motion for Final Approval of Settlement and Response to Objections (Hartmann, Michelle) (Entered 65 Minute Entry for proceedings held before Judge Barbara M. G. Lynn Motion Hearing held on re 57 Motion for Approval of Settlement Agreement filed by Michael P McMahon, Mark Woodall, Paul J Madson. Attorney Appearances SECTION PlaintiffSECTION - Esther Tamburo-Lander/Andrew Braniff; Defense - Ralph Miller/Erin Echols/Michelle Hartmann-Murawski/Margaret Allen. (Court Reporter Sue Engledow) Time in Court 55 mins. (tln) (Entered 66 ORDER SETTING HEARING A continuation of the hearing on the final approval of a settlement agreement will be held at 9 00 a.m. (Signed by Judge Barbara M. G. Lynn on (klm) (Entered 67 Unopposed MOTION to Seal Document re Notice of Filing Objections at Dkt No. 56 filed by Mark Woodall, Michael P McMahon, Paul J Madson (Attachments # 1 Exhibit Tab 1 to Unopposed Motion) (Cunningham, John) (Entered 68 NOTICE of Filing Supplemental Objection filed by Mark Woodall, Michael P McMahon, Paul J Madson (Cunningham, John) (Entered SECTION Case SECTION 3 As of 01 21 AM CDT 9 of 10 MOTION for Leave to File Redacted Version of the Notice filed by Mark Woodall, Michael P McMahon, Paul J Madson. (see doc. 67 for image) (klm) (Entered 69 Minute Entry for proceedings held before Judge Barbara M. G. Lynn Motion Hearing held on re 57 Joint MOTION Final Approval of the Settlement Agreement filed by Michael P McMahon, Mark Woodall, Paul J Madson. Attorney Appearances SECTION PlaintiffSECTION - Esteher Tamburo-Lander, Andrew Braniff; Defense - Ralph Miller/Erin Echols/Michelle Hartmann-Murawski/Margaret Allen. (Court Reporter Sue Engledow.) Time in Court 1hr 45min. (lmp) (Entered 70 TRANSCRIPT of Settlement Proceedings held on July 24, 2008 before Judge Barbara M.G. Lynn. Court Reporter/Transcriber P. Sue Engledow, Telephone number Parties are notified of their duty to review the transcript. A copy may be purchased from the court reporter or viewed at the clerk's office public terminal. If redaction is necessary, a Redaction Request - Transcript must be filed within 21 days. If no such Request is filed, the transcript will be made available via PACER without redaction after 90 calendar days. The clerk will mail a copy of this notice to parties not electronically noticed. Redaction Request due Redacted Transcript Deadline set for Release of Transcript Restriction set for (pse) (Entered 71 Minute Entry for proceedings held before Judge Barbara M. G. Lynn Telephone Conference on the Joint Motion for Final Approval of the Settlement. Attorney Appearances SECTION PlaintiffSECTION - Esther Tamburo-Lander; Andrew Braniff; Defense - Ralph Miller, Erin Eckols, Michelle Hartmann-Murawski, Jennifer Brandeis. (Court Reporter Sue Engledow.) Time in Court /15. (klm) (Entered 72 ORDER granting 67 Unopposed MOTION to Permanently Seal Notice of Filing Objections at Dkt No. 56. and Request for Leave to File Redacted Version of the Notice. (see order) (Signed by Judge Barbara M. G. Lynn on (lmp) (Entered 73 NOTICE of Filing Objections to Settlement Agreement (Redacted) filed by Mark Woodall, Michael P McMahon, Paul J Madson. (lmp) (Entered 74 Final Order Approving Settlement, Certifying Class, and Directing Dismissal. (see order) (Signed by Judge Barbara M. G. Lynn on (lmp) (Entered 75 TRANSCRIPT of Settlement Proceedings held on July 24, 2008 before Judge Barbara M.G. Lynn. Court Reporter/Transcriber P. Sue Engledow, Telephone number Parties are notified of their duty to review the transcript. A copy may be purchased from the court reporter or viewed at the clerk's office public terminal. If redaction is necessary, a Redaction Request - Transcript must be filed within 21 days. If no such Request is filed, the transcript will be made available via PACER without redaction after 90 calendar days. The clerk will mail a copy of this notice to parties not electronically noticed. Redaction Request due Redacted Transcript Deadline set for Release of Transcript Restriction set for (pse) (Entered 76 TRANSCRIPT of Settlement (Cont'd) Proceedings held on July 30 &August 1, 2008 before Judge Barbara M.G. Lynn. Court Reporter/Transcriber P. Sue Engledow, Telephone number Parties are notified of their duty to review the transcript. A copy may be purchased from the court reporter or viewed at the clerk's office public terminal. If redaction is necessary, a Redaction Request - Transcript must be filed within 21 days. If no such Request is filed, the transcript will be made available via PACER without redaction after 90 calendar days. The clerk will mail a copy of this notice to parties not electronically noticed. Redaction Request due Redacted Transcript Deadline set for Release of Transcript Restriction set for (pse) (Entered 77 Supplemental Document by American Airlines Inc Letter notifying Court, in accordance with Court's Minute Order of American Airlines has posed notificiation of all Settlement Class Members on its website. (Hartmann, Michelle) (Entered SECTION Case SECTION 3 As of 01 21 AM CDT 10 of 10 78 NOTICE of Final Certification filed by American Airlines Inc (Hartmann, Michelle) (Entered Summary: This class action suit was filed on January 12, 2006, under 38 U.S.C. § 4301, et seq. ( USERRA ) in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Texas. The plaintiff class consisted of all past and present pilots of American Airlines who are or were members of the United States Armed Services and who took military leave from January 2001 to 2006. They asked the court for injunctive and declaratory relief, alleging that American Airlines had violated USERRA by discriminating against pilots who took military leaves of absence. They claimed that they were unfairly charged fewer in service days which prevented them from bidding on a number of benefits including flight schedules, paid vacation time, and earned sick leave. Pilots who had taken comparable types of non-military leave were not similarly penalized. After filing two amended complaints, and the court denying the defendants' second motion to dismiss, the plaintiffs motion to certify class, preliminarily approve settlement agreement, and approve forms of class notice. This motion was granted by U.S. District Court Judge Barbara M.G. Lynn in a final order on August 1, 2008.

This class action suit was filed on January 12, 2006, under 38 U.S.C. § 4301, et seq. ( USERRA ) in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Texas. The plaintiff class consisted of all past and present pilots of American Airlines who are or were members of the United States Armed Services and who took military leave from January 2001 to 2006. They asked the court for injunctive and declaratory relief, alleging that American Airlines had violated USERRA by discriminating against pilots who took military leaves of absence. They claimed that they were unfairly charged fewer in service days which prevented them from bidding on a number of benefits including flight schedules, paid vacation time, and earned sick leave. Pilots who had taken comparable types of non-military leave were not similarly penalized. After filing two amended complaints, and the court denying the defendants' second motion to dismiss, the plaintiffs motion to certify class, preliminarily approve settlement agreement, and approve forms of class notice. This motion was granted by U.S. District Court Judge Barbara M.G. Lynn in a final order on August 1, 2008.

Using the provided source, generate a concise summary: SECTION SECTION Case SECTION 1 As of 07 55 PM EDT 1 of 16 CLOSED,JURY,TYPE-H U.S. District Court District of Columbia (Washington, DC) CIVIL DOCKET FOR CASE # 1 AUGST-JOHNSON et al v. MORGAN STANLEY DW, INC. Assigned to Judge Colleen Kollar-Kotelly SECTION Case SECTION 1 Cause 28 1331 Fed. Question Employment Discrimination SECTION PlaintiffSECTION Date Filed Date Terminated Jury Demand SECTION PlaintiffSECTION Nature of Suit 442 Civil Rights Jobs Jurisdiction Federal Question JOANNE AUGST-JOHNSON represented by Steven M. Sprenger SPRENGER & LANG, PLLC 5501 Park Street Chevy Chase, MD 20815 (202) Email [email protected] LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED Christopher M. Moody MOODY & WARNER, P.C. 4169 Montgomery Boulevard, NE Albuquerque, NM 87109 (505) Fax (505) Email [email protected] ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED Cyrus Mehri MEHRI & SKALET, PLLC 1250 Connecticut Avenue, NW Suite 300 Washington, DC 20036 (202) Fax (202) Email [email protected] ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED Ellen L. Eardley MEHRI & SKALET, PLLC 1250 Connecticut Avenue, NW Suite 300 Washington, DC 20036 (202) Fax (202) Email [email protected] TERMINATED Kelly M. Dermody LEIFF, CABRASER, HEIMANN & BERNSTEIN, LLP Embarcadero Center West 275 Battery Street 29th Floor San Francisco, CA Fax Email [email protected] PRO HAC VICE ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED SECTION Case SECTION 1 As of 07 55 PM EDT 2 of 16 Mara R. Thompson SPRENGER & LANG, PLLC 310 Fourth Avenue South Suite 600 Minneapolis, MN 55415 (612) Fax (612) Email [email protected] ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED Whitney Warner MOODY & WARNER, P.C. 4169 Montgomery Boulevard, NE Albuquerque, NM 87109 (505) Fax (505) Email [email protected] ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED SECTION PlaintiffSECTION NANCY REEVES represented by Steven M. Sprenger (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED Christopher M. Moody (See above for address) ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED Cyrus Mehri (See above for address) ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED Ellen L. Eardley (See above for address) TERMINATED Kelly M. Dermody (See above for address) PRO HAC VICE ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED Mara R. Thompson (See above for address) ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED Whitney Warner (See above for address) ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED SECTION PlaintiffSECTION DEBRA SHAW represented by Steven M. Sprenger (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED Christopher M. Moody (See above for address) ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED Cyrus Mehri (See above for address) ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED SECTION Case SECTION 1 As of 07 55 PM EDT 3 of 16 Ellen L. Eardley (See above for address) TERMINATED Kelly M. Dermody (See above for address) PRO HAC VICE ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED Mara R. Thompson 4585 Weston Lane North Plymouth, MN 55446 (763) Email [email protected] ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED Whitney Warner (See above for address) ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED SECTION PlaintiffSECTION CHERYL GUISTINIANO represented by Steven M. Sprenger (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED Christopher M. Moody (See above for address) ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED Cyrus Mehri (See above for address) ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED Ellen L. Eardley (See above for address) TERMINATED Kelly M. Dermody (See above for address) PRO HAC VICE ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED Mara R. Thompson (See above for address) ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED Whitney Warner (See above for address) ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED SECTION PlaintiffSECTION LAURIE BLACKBURN On behalf of themselves and all others similarly situated represented by Steven M. Sprenger (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED Christopher M. Moody (See above for address) ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED Cyrus Mehri (See above for address) ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED SECTION Case SECTION 1 As of 07 55 PM EDT 4 of 16 SECTION PlaintiffSECTION JAN TYLER SECTION PlaintiffSECTION ERMA TARANTINO SECTION PlaintiffSECTION ELIZABETH REINKE Ellen L. Eardley (See above for address) TERMINATED Kelly M. Dermody (See above for address) PRO HAC VICE ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED Mara R. Thom Summary: Female financial advisers employed by Morgan Stanley sued under Title VII and the Federal Age Discrimination in Employment Act, alleging that Morgan Stanley had a systemic pattern and practice of discriminating against female employees in compensation, promotions, and other areas. The parties settled, with Morgan Stanley paying $46m in damages, fees, and costs of administration, and agreeing to injunctive relief. This case was later consolidated with Amochaev v. Citigroup Global Markets Inc.

Female financial advisers employed by Morgan Stanley sued under Title VII and the Federal Age Discrimination in Employment Act, alleging that Morgan Stanley had a systemic pattern and practice of discriminating against female employees in compensation, promotions, and other areas. The parties settled, with Morgan Stanley paying $46m in damages, fees, and costs of administration, and agreeing to injunctive relief. This case was later consolidated with Amochaev v. Citigroup Global Markets Inc.

Using the provided source, generate a concise summary: SECTION SECTION Case SECTION 2 As of 02 50 PM EST 1 of 9 CLOSED,FJL,MEDIATION,REF_DISCOV,REF_SETTLEMENT U.S. District Court Southern District of Florida (Ft Pierce) CIVIL DOCKET FOR CASE # 2 Equal Employment Opportunity Commission v. Bay State Milling Company Assigned to Judge Donald L. Graham Referred to Magistrate Judge Frank J. Lynch, Jr Magistrate Judge Jonathan Goodman (Settlement) Cause 29 0623 Job Discrimination (Age) SECTION PlaintiffSECTION Date Filed Date Terminated Jury Demand SECTION PlaintiffSECTION Nature of Suit 442 Civil Rights Jobs Jurisdiction U.S. Government SECTION PlaintiffSECTION Equal Employment Opportunity Commission represented by Gwendolyn Y. Reams Equal Employment Opportunity Commission 131 M. Street, N.E. Washington, DC 20507 LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED James L. Lee Equal Employment Opportunity Commission 131 M. Street, N.E. Washington, DC 20507 LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED Kimberly Anne McCoy Equal Employment Opportunity Commission Miami District Office Miami Tower 100 S.E. 2nd Street Suite 1500 Miami, FL 33131 Fax Email [email protected] LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED P. David Lopez United States Department of Justice Civil Rights Division PO Box 65968 Washington, DC LEAD ATTORNEY Robert Elliot Weisberg U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission Miami District Office One Biscayne Tower 2 South Biscayne Boulevard Suite 2700 Miami, FL 33131 Fax Email [email protected] LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED SECTION Case SECTION 2 As of 02 50 PM EST 2 of 9 Aarrin Benatra Golson U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission Miami District Office Miami Tower 100 SE 2nd Street Suite 1500 Miami, FL 33131 Fax Email [email protected] ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED V. Consol SECTION PlaintiffSECTION Gary Legore represented by Gary Legore 9495 Rye Crrek Road Lonedell, Mo 63060 PRO SE Cathleen Ann Scott Scott Wagner &Associates, P.A. 250 South Central Boulevard Jupiter Gardens Suite 104 Jupiter, FL 33458 Fax Email [email protected] LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED V. SECTION DefendantSECTION Bay State Milling Company represented by Jennifer A. Schwartz Jackson Lewis P.C. 2 S Biscayne Boulevard Suite 3500 Miami, FL 33131 Fax Email [email protected] LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED Kim M. Lucas Liebler Gonzalez &Portuondo 44 West Flagler Street 25th Floor Miami, FL 33130 United Sta Fax Email [email protected] TERMINATED LEAD ATTORNEY Jeremiah Richard Jones Jackson Lewis P.C. One Biscayne Tower, 35th Floor SECTION Case SECTION 2 As of 02 50 PM EST 3 of 9 2 South Biscayne Blvd. Miami, FL 33131 Fax Email [email protected] ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED Thomas Mead Santoro Jackson Lewis P.C. 2 S Biscayne Boulevard Suite 3500 One Biscayne Tower Miami, FL Fax Email [email protected] ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED Date Filed # Docket Text 1 COMPLAINT against Bay State Milling Company. Filing fee $ USA Filer - No Filing Fee Required, filed by Eeoc. (Attachments # 1 Civil Cover Sheet, # 2 Summon(s))(Golson, Aarrin) (Entered 2 Judge Assignment to Judge Donald L. Graham and Magistrate Judge Frank J. Lynch, Jr (tpl) (Entered 3 Summons Issued as to Bay State Milling Company. (tpl) (Entered 4 Bar Letter re Admissions sent to attorneys James L. Lee and Gwendolyn Y. Reams, mailing date December 11, 2012. (ksa) (Entered 5 SECTION DefendantSECTION's ANSWER and Affirmative Defenses to Complaint by Bay State Milling Company.(Schwartz, Jennifer) (Entered 6 NOTICE of Attorney Appearance by Kim M. Lucas on behalf of Bay State Milling Company (Lucas, Kim) (Entered 7 Corporate Disclosure Statement by Bay State Milling Company (Schwartz, Jennifer) (Entered 8 ORDER Setting Status Conference Telephonic Status Conference set for 02 00 PM before Judge Donald L. Graham. Signed by Judge Donald L. Graham on (lbc) (Entered 9 Clerk's Notice of Undeliverable Mail re 2 Judge Assignment. US Mail returned for Attorney P. David Lopez. The Court has not located an updated address for this party. After two unsuccessful noticing attempts, notices from the Court will no longer be sent to this party in this case until a correct address is provided. (cqs) (Entered 10 NOTICE by Equal Employment Opportunity Commission of Pending Similar Action (Golson, Aarrin) (Entered 11 STATUS REPORT by Bay State Milling Company, Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (Schwartz, Jennifer) (Entered 12 CONSENT to Jurisdiction by US Magistrate Judge by Bay State Milling Company, Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (Lucas, Kim) (Entered 13 Minute Entry for proceedings held before Judge Donald L. Graham Status Conference held on Court Reporter Carly Horenkamp, / [email protected] (cf) (Entered 14 SCHEDULING ORDER. Telephonic Pretrial Conference set for 02 00 PM before Judge Donald L. Graham. Jury Trial set for before Judge Donald L. Graham. Telephonic Calendar Call set for 02 00 PM before Judge Donald L. Graham. Amended Pleadings due by Discovery due by Joinder of Parties due by Motions due by Pretrial SECTION Case SECTION 2 As of 02 50 PM EST 4 of 9 Stipulation due by Notice of Court Practice. Signed by Judge Donald L. Graham on (lbc) (Entered 15 ORDER REFERRING CASE to Mediation. Signed by Judge Donald L. Graham on (lbc) (Entered 16 ORDER REFERRING CASE to Magistrate Judge Frank J. Lynch, Jr for Discovery Proceedings. Signed by Judge Donald L. Graham on (lbc) (Entered 17 Notice of Mediation Hearing before Mediator, Cori Flam Meltzer filed by Cori Flam Meltzer. Mediation Hearing set for 09 30 AM (Meltzer, Cori) (Entered 18 ORDER Scheduling Mediation before Cathleen Scott. Mediation Hearing set for 09 30 AM. Signed by Judge Donald L. Graham on (lbc) (Entered 19 Clerk's Notice of Undeliverable Mail re 8 Order Setting Status Conference. US Mail returned for ATTORNEY P. DAVID LOPEZ. The Court has not located an updated address for this party. After two unsuccessful noticing attempts, notices from the Court will no longer be sent to this party in this case until a correct address is provided. (lbc) (Entered 20 Clerk's Notice of Undeliverable Mail re 13 Status Conference. US Mail returned for ATTORNEY P. DAVID LOPEZ. The Court has not located an updated address for this party. After two unsuccessful noticing attempts, notices from the Court will no longer be sent to this party in this case until a correct address is provided. (lbc) (Entered 21 FINAL MEDIATION REPORT by Cori Flam Meltzer. Disposition Case did not settle.(Meltzer, Cori) (Entered 22 SECTION DefendantSECTION's MOTION to Compel SECTION PlaintiffSECTION Gary Legore's Deposition and to Compel the EEOC to Produce Responses to SECTION DefendantSECTION's Discovery Requests by Bay State Milling Company. Responses due by (Attachments # 1 Exhibit A - Discovery Requests, # 2 Exhibit B - EEOC Letter, # 3 Exhibit C - Notice of Deposition, # 4 Exhibit D - March 12 Letter, # 5 Exhibit E - March 20 Letter, # 6 Exhibit F - March 26 e-mail, # 7 Exhibit G - March 27 e-mail, # 8 Exhibit H - March 28 e-mail, # 9 Exhibit I - March 29 e-mail, # 10 Exhibit J - April 1 e-mail)(Schwartz, Jennifer) (Entered 23 ORDER DIRECTING EXPEDITED BRIEFING SCHEDULE. Responses due by noon on Replies due by 4 00 p.m. on Signed by Magistrate Judge Frank J. Lynch, Jr on (lbc) (Entered 24 RESPONSE in Opposition re 22 SECTION DefendantSECTION's MOTION to Compel SECTION PlaintiffSECTION Gary Legore's Deposition and to Compel the EEOC to Produce Responses to SECTION DefendantSECTION's Discovery Requests filed by Gary Legore. (Scott, Cathleen) (Entered 25 REPLY to Response to Motion re 22 SECTION DefendantSECTION's MOTION to Compel SECTION PlaintiffSECTION Gary Legore's Deposition and to Compel the EEOC to Produce Responses to SECTION DefendantSECTION's Discovery Requests filed by Bay State Milling Company. (Attachments # 1 Exhibit A)(Schwartz, Jennifer) (Entered 26 MOTION for Extension of Time to File Response/Reply as to 23 Order, Set/Reset Deadlines by Equal Employment Opportunity Commission. (Attachments # 1 Text of Proposed Order Proposed Order for Extension of Time)(Golson, Aarrin) (Entered 27 RESPONSE to Motion re 22 SECTION DefendantSECTION's MOTION to Compel SECTION PlaintiffSECTION Gary Legore's Deposition and to Compel the EEOC to Produce Responses to SECTION DefendantSECTION's Discovery Requests filed by Equal Employment Opportunity Commission. Replies due by (Attachments # 1 Exhibit A, # 2 Exhibit B, # 3 Exhibit C, # 4 Exhibit D)(Golson, Aarrin) (Entered SECTION Case SECTION 2 As of 02 50 PM EST 5 of 9 29 ORDER granting 26 Motion for Extension of Time. Signed by Magistrate Judge Frank J. Lynch, Jr on (lbc) (Entered 28 ORDER granting in part, denying in part 22 Motion to Compel. Signed by Magistrate Judge Frank J. Lynch, Jr on (lbc) (Entered 30 NOTICE of Attorney Appearance by Jeremiah Richard Jones on behalf of Bay State Milling Company (Jones, Jeremiah) (Entered 31 ORDER GRANTED conditionallly re 30 Notice of Attorney Appearance filed by Bay State Milling Company Signed by Judge Donald L. Graham on (dj) (Entered 32 SECTION DefendantSECTION's MOTION to Compel Better Responses to SECTION DefendantSECTION's First Set of Interrogatories and First Request for Production of Documents from SECTION PlaintiffSECTION by Bay State Milling Company. Responses due by (Attachments # 1 Exhibit A - Discovery Requests, # 2 Exhibit B - Letter, # 3 Exhibit C - Discovery Responses, # 4 Exhibit D - Privilege Logs, # 5 Exhibit E - Letter, # 6 Exhibit F - Letter, # 7 Exhibit G - Email, # 8 Exhibit H - Letter, # 9 Exhibit I - Email, # 10 Exhibit J - Supplemental Discovery Responses, # 11 Exhibit K - Email, # 12 Exhibit L - Email)(Schwartz, Jennifer) (Entered 33 SECTION PlaintiffSECTION's MOTION for Extension of Time to Respond to SECTION DefendantSECTION's Motion to Compel Better Discovery Responses by Equal Employment Opportunity Commission. Responses due by (Golson, Aarrin) (Entered 34 ORDER denying 33 Motion for Extension of Time, SECTION PlaintiffSECTION shall file response by current deadline, June 10, 2013. And, SECTION DefendantSECTION may file reply by noon, Signed by Magistrate Judge Frank J. Lynch, Jr on (cga) (Entered 35 RESPONSE in Opposition re 32 SECTION DefendantSECTION's MOTION to Compel Better Responses to SECTION DefendantSECTION's First Set of Interrogatories and First Request for Production of Documents from SECTION PlaintiffSECTION filed by Equal Employment Opportunity Commission. (Attachments # 1 Exhibit A - Email 3/27, # 2 Exhibit B - Email 4/22, # 3 Exhibit C - Affidavit, # 4 Exhibit D - Privelege Log, # 5 Exhibit E - Chair Declaration, # 6 Exhibit F - Email Aarrin) (Entered 36 REPLY to Response to Motion re 22 SECTION DefendantSECTION's MOTION to Compel SECTION PlaintiffSECTION Gary Legore's Deposition and to Compel the EEOC to Produce Responses to SECTION DefendantSECTION's Discovery Requests filed by Bay State Milling Company. (Attachments # 1 Exhibit A - Email)(Schwartz, Jennifer) (Entered 37 ORDER denying 32 Motion to Compel. Signed by Magistrate Judge Frank J. Lynch, Jr on (cga) (Entered 38 Unopposed MOTION for Extension of Time to File Pre-Trial Motions by Bay State Milling Company. Responses due by (Attachments # 1 Text of Proposed Order)(Schwartz, Jennifer) (Entered 39 ORDER granting 38 Unopposed MOTION for Extension of Time to File Pre-Trial Motions. Motions due by Signed by Judge Donald L. Graham on (lbc) (Entered 40 SECTION DefendantSECTION's MOTION for Summary Judgment and Supporting Memorandum of Law by Bay State Milling Company. Responses due by (Schwartz, Jennifer) (Entered 41 Statement of Undisputed Material Facts in Support of Its Motion for Summary Judgment by Bay State Milling Company re 40 SECTION DefendantSECTION's MOTION for Summary Judgment and Supporting Memorandum of Law (Schwartz, Jennifer) (Entered 42 NOTICE by Bay State Milling Company re 41 Statement re Filing Excerpts from Deposition Transcripts and Exhibits and Affidavit in Support of Its Statement of Undisputed Material Facts and Motion for Summary Judgment (Attachments # 1 Exhibit A - Excerpts - Legore, # 2 Exhibit B - Excerpts - Hawkes, # 3 Exhibit C - Excerpts - Galluzzo, # 4 Exhibit D - Excerpts - Long, # 5 Exhibit E - Excerpts SECTION Case SECTION 2 As of 02 50 PM EST 6 of 9 - Wunderly, # 6 Exhibit F - Excerpts - Dooley, # 7 Exhibit G - Excerpts - Raiola, # 8 Exhibit H - Affidavit - Raiola)(Schwartz, Jennifer) (Entered 43 SECTION PlaintiffSECTION's MOTION for Extension of Time to File Its Response to SECTION DefendantSECTION's Motion for Summary Judgment by Equal Employment Opportunity Commission. Responses due by (Golson, Aarrin) (Entered 44 ORDER granting 43 Motion for Extension of Time. Responses due by Signed by Judge Donald L. Graham on (lbc) (Entered 45 SECTION PlaintiffSECTION's MOTION to Stay Due to Government Shutdown by Equal Employment Opportunity Commission. Responses due by (Attachments # 1 Exhibit, # 2 Exhibit)(Golson, Aarrin) (Entered 46 ORDER GRANTING 45 EEOCS MOTION FOR A STAY DUE TO GOVERNMENT SHUTDOWN. Signed by Judge Donald L. Graham on (lbc) (Entered 47 PAPERLESS Order Cancelling Telephonic Pretrial Conference set at 2 00 PM per Order staying action due to government shutdown. Signed by Judge Donald L. Graham on (gfw) (Entered 48 ORDER LIFITING STAY DUE TO GOVERNMENT SHUTDOWN. Signed by Judge Donald L. Graham on (lbc) (Entered 49 AMENDED SCHEDULING ORDER RESETTING PRETRIAL CONFERENCE, CALENDAR CALL AND TRIAL DATE. Pretrial Conference set for (telephonic) before Judge Donald L. Graham. Jury Trial set for before Judge Donald L. Graham. Calendar Call set for (telephonic) 02 00 PM before Judge Donald L. Graham. Pretrial Stipulation due by Signed by Judge Donald L. Graham on (lbc) (Entered 50 NOTICE by Bay State Milling Company re Notice of Withdrawal of Kim M. Lucas, Esq. (Schwartz, Jennifer) (Entered Attorney Kim M. Lucas terminated PER DE 50. (lbc) (Entered 51 RESPONSE in Opposition re 40 SECTION DefendantSECTION's MOTION for Summary Judgment and Supporting Memorandum of Law filed by Equal Employment Opportunity Commission. (Golson, Aarrin) (Entered 52 Statement of Material Facts by Equal Employment Opportunity Commission re 51 Response in Opposition to Motion (Golson, Aarrin) (Entered 53 NOTICE by Equal Employment Opportunity Commission re 52 Statement e Exhibits in Support of Response in Opposition to Motion for Summary Judgment (Attachments # 1 Exhibit, # 2 Exhibit, # 3 Exhibit, # 4 Exhibit, # 5 Exhibit, # 6 Exhibit, # 7 Exhibit, # 8 Exhibit, # 9 Exhibit, # 10 Exhibit, # 11 Exhibit, # 12 Exhibit, # 13 Exhibit, # 14 Exhibit, # 15 Exhibit, # 16 Exhibit, # 17 Exhibit, # 18 Exhibit, # 19 Exhibit, # 20 Exhibit, # 21 Exhibit, # 22 Exhibit, # 23 Exhibit, # 24 Exhibit, # 25 Exhibit, # 26 Exhibit, # 27 Exhibit, # 28 Exhibit, # 29 Exhibit, # 30 Exhibit, # 31 Exhibit, # 32 Exhibit, # 33 Exhibit, # 34 Exhibit)(Golson, Aarrin) (Entered 54 NOTICE by Equal Employment Opportunity Commission re 51 Response in Opposition to Motion (Filing Corrected Brief) (Golson, Aarrin) (Entered 55 RESPONSE in Opposition re 40 SECTION DefendantSECTION's MOTION for Summary Judgment and Supporting Memorandum of Law filed by Equal Employment Opportunity Commission. (Golson, Aarrin) (Entered 56 SECTION PlaintiffSECTION's MOTION Request for Oral Argument by Equal Employment Opportunity Commission. (Golson, Aarrin) (Entered 57 REPLY to Response to Motion re 40 SECTION DefendantSECTION's MOTION for Summary Judgment and Supporting Memorandum of Law re Reply Brief in Support of Its Motion for Summary Judgment filed by Bay State Milling Company. (Schwartz, SECTION Case SECTION 2 As of 02 50 PM EST 7 of 9 Jennifer) (Entered 58 NOTICE of Striking 57 Reply to Response to Motion, filed by Bay State Milling Company by Bay State Milling Company (Schwartz, Jennifer) (Entered 59 RESPONSE/REPLY to 55 Response in Opposition to Motion re Reply Brief in Support of Its Motion for Summary Judgment by Bay State Milling Company. (Schwartz, Jennifer) (Entered 60 SECOND AMENDED SCHEDULING ORDER, RESETTING PRETRIAL CONFERENCE, CALENDAR CALL AND TRIAL DATE. Pretrial Conference set for 02 00 PM (telephonically) before Judge Donald L. Graham. Jury Trial set for before Judge Donald L. Graham. Calendar Call set for 02 00 PM (telephonically) before Judge Donald L. Graham. Pretrial Stipulation due by Signed by Judge Donald L. Graham on (lbc) (Entered 61 NOTICE of Attorney Appearance by Thomas Mead Santoro on behalf of Bay State Milling Company. Attorney Thomas Mead Santoro added to party Bay State Milling Company(pty dft). (Santoro, Thomas) (Entered 62 ORDER REFERRING CASE to Magistrate Judge Jonathan Goodman for Settlement. Signed by Judge Donald L. Graham on (lbc) (Entered 63 ORDER setting Settlement Conference for at 9 30 a.m. in the Miami Division before Magistrate Judge Jonathan Goodman. Signed by Magistrate Judge Jonathan Goodman on (oim) (Entered 64 Unopposed MOTION to Consolidate Cases for Trial by Bay State Milling Company. Responses due by (Schwartz, Jennifer) (Entered 65 ENDORSED ORDER RESETTING 63 Settlement Conference to at 1 30 p.m. in the Miami Division before Magistrate Judge Jonathan Goodman. All other deadlines and directives in the 63 Court's order remain unchanged. Signed by Magistrate Judge Jonathan Goodman on (oim) (Entered 66 Paperless Minute Entry for proceedings held before Magistrate Judge Jonathan Goodman Settlement Conference held on Case settled. The case was largely resolved and the parties will in the next 10 days finalize any remaining details concerning the proposed consent decree.(Digital 13 30 (Entered 67 ORDER regarding improper ex parte submissions. Signed by Magistrate Judge Jonathan Goodman on (Attachments #(1) Mediation E-Mail, #(2) Release E-Mail, #(3) Downstairs E-Mail) (cct) (Entered 68 ORDER on additional improper ex parte submissions. Signed by Magistrate Judge Jonathan Goodman on (Attachments #(1) Life E-Mail, #(2) Donna m ballman E-Mail) (cct) (Entered 69 Joint MOTION for Approval of Consent Decree by Equal Employment Opportunity Commission. (Attachments # 1 Exhibit Consent Decree)(Golson, Aarrin) (Entered 70 CONSENT DECREE. Signed by Judge Donald L. Graham on (lbc) (Entered 71 Administrative Order Closing Case. Signed by Judge Donald L. Graham on (lbc) (Entered 72 Unopposed MOTION to Continue re Motion for a Status Conference by Bay State Milling Company. Responses due by (Attachments # 1 Text of Proposed Order Proposed Order)(Schwartz, Jennifer) (Entered 73 ORDER granting 72 Motion for Status Conference. Status Conference is set for at 10 00 a.m. in the Miami Division before Magistrate Judge Jonathan SECTION Case SECTION 2 As of 02 50 PM EST 8 of 9 Goodman. Signed by Magistrate Judge Jonathan Goodman on (oim) (Entered 74 ENDORSED ORDER regarding status conference scheduled for January 22, 2014. In addition to the issues raised in SECTION DefendantSECTION's unopposed motion, the status conference will also address attorney Arthur Schofield's currently-pending motion to withdraw in Case No. Therefore, the parties (including Mr. Legore) and counsel (including Mr. Schofield, whose withdrawal motion is currently pending) SHALL personally appear at the January 22 status conference. The hearing will also discuss the parties' compliance with the settlement agreement reached at the mediation. Failure to appear may result in the Undersigned ordering the non-compliant party or attorney to show cause why he or she should not be sanctioned. Mr. Legore's current counsel of record shall provide Mr. Legore with a copy of this Order. Signed by Magistrate Judge Jonathan Goodman on (cct) (Entered 75 Paperless Minute Entry for proceedings held before Magistrate Judge Jonathan Goodman Status Conference re settlement discussions held on Court orders a copy of sealed transcript of the mediation settlement held on Order to be issued by the Court. Parties Kimberly Anne McCoy-Cruz, attorney for SECTION PlaintiffSECTION Equal Employment Opportunity Commission and Consol SECTION PlaintiffSECTION, Gary Legore; Attorneys for SECTION DefendantSECTION, Jennifer Schwartz and Thomas Santoro.(Digital 09 59 11.) (mso) (Entered 76 ORDER granting 75 ore tenus motion to seal transcript of 66 Settlement Conference. Signed by Magistrate Judge Jonathan Goodman on (oim) (Entered 77 TRANSCRIPT of Sealed Settlement Conference Hearing held on before Magistrate Judge Jonathan Goodman; Court Reporter Jerald M. Meyers, pages 1-15 (nc). Modified by Unsealing Transcript pursuant to 92 Endorsed Order on (nc). (Entered 78 MOTION to Vacate Settlement by Gary Legore. Responses due by (lbc) (Entered 79 ORDER REFERRING 78 MOTION to Vacate filed by Gary Legore. Motions referred to Jonathan Goodman Signed by Judge Donald L. Graham on (lbc) (Entered 80 ORDER setting briefing schedule as to 78 MOTION to Vacate. Responses due by Signed by Magistrate Judge Jonathan Goodman on (hs00) (Entered 81 RESPONSE in Opposition re 78 MOTION to Vacate and Motion to Enforce Settlement Agreement filed by Bay State Milling Company. (Attachments # 1 Exhibit A, # 2 Exhibit B)(Schwartz, Jennifer) (Entered 82 Order on briefing regarding 81 SECTION DefendantSECTION's Motion to Enforce Settlement. Responses due by Signed by Magistrate Judge Jonathan Goodman on (oim) (Entered 83 MOTION for Extension of Time to File Response/Reply as to 78 MOTION to Vacate (Partially Unopposed) by Equal Employment Opportunity Commission. (Attachments # 1 Text of Proposed Order Proposed Order Granting Motion)(McCoy, Kimberly) (Entered 84 ORDER granting 83 the EEOC's Motion for Extension of Time to File Response as to 78 Legore's MOTION to Vacate. Response due by Signed by Magistrate Judge Jonathan Goodman on (oim) (Entered 85 RESPONSE/REPLY to 78 MOTION to Vacate Settlement by Equal Employment Opportunity Commission. (Attachments # 1 Exhibit A Final Consent Decree, # 2 Exhibit B Email from Jennifer Schwartz - REDACTED)(McCoy, Kimberly) (Entered 86 RESPONSE to Motion re 83 MOTION for Extension of Time to File Response/Reply as to 78 MOTION to Vacate (Partially Unopposed) Response to SECTION Case SECTION 2 As of 02 50 PM EST 9 of 9 BSM's Motion to Enforce Settlement Agreement and Cross Motion Requesting the Court to Require BSM to Demonstrate Compliance with the Consent Decree filed by Equal Employment Opportunity Commission. Replies due by (Attachments # 1 Exhibit A Final Consent Decree, # 2 Exhibit B Email from Jennifer Schwartz - REDACTED)(McCoy, Kimberly) (Entered 87 ENDORSED ORDER concerning EEOC's cross motion requesting that the Court require Bay State to demonstrate compliance with the consent decree. Bay State shall respond with a double-spaced memorandum of no more than 5 pages, excluding the certificate of service and signature block, by April 2, 2014. No reply is permitted. In addition, the EEOC shall immediately serve Mr. Legore with a copy of its motion and this endorsed order by mail and email, and Bay State shall also serve Mr. Legore (by the same methods) with a copy of its response memorandum immediately upon uploading it onto the CM/ECF system. Signed by Magistrate Judge Jonathan Goodman on (JG) (Entered 88 RESPONSE/REPLY to 85 Response/Reply (Other), 86 Response to Motion, re SECTION DefendantSECTION's Response in Opposition to the EEOC's Cross Motion for an Evidentiary Hearing to Determine SECTION DefendantSECTION's Compliance with the Consent Decree and Its Confidential Settlement Agreement with Legore by Bay State Milling Company. (Attachments # 1 Exhibit A - composite)(Schwartz, Jennifer) (Entered 89 ORDER REFERRING Cross Motion 86 to Magistrate Judge Goodman. Signed by Judge Donald L. Graham on (lbc) (Entered 90 TRANSCRIPT of SECTION PlaintiffSECTION Attorney Motion to Withdraw &Status Conference Hearing held on before Magistrate Judge Jonathan Goodman, 1-44 pages, Court Reporter Jerald M. Meyers, / [email protected]. Transcript may be viewed at the court public terminal or purchased by contacting the Court Reporter/Transcriber before the deadline for Release of Transcript Restriction. After that date it may be obtained through PACER. Redaction Request due Redacted Transcript Deadline set for Release of Transcript Restriction set for (Attachments # 1 Designation)(mc) (Entered 91 REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS re 86 Motion for Bay State to Demonstrate Compliance with Consent Decree filed by Equal Employment Opportunity Commission and 78 MOTION to Vacate filed by Gary Legore. Signed by Magistrate Judge Jonathan Goodman on (oim) (Entered 92 ENDORSED ORDER. The Clerk of the Court is directed to Unseal 77 the transcript of the settlement conference. See 91 Order Unsealing 77. Signed by Magistrate Judge Jonathan Goodman on (oim) (Entered 93 CLERK'S NOTICE of Compliance by Unsealing 77 Transcript pursuant to 92 Endorsed Order (nc) (Entered 94 OBJECTIONS to 91 Report and Recommendations by Gary Legore. (lbc) (Entered 95 ORDER. Denying 78 Motion to Vacate ; Adopting 91 Report and Recommendations. Signed by Judge Donald L. Graham on (lbc) (Entered Summary: On January 2013, the EEOC filed this lawsuit in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Florida against Bay State Milling Company, alleging violations of the Age Discrimination in Employment Act (ADEA) and the Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA).. The EEOC sought injunctive and monetary relief as well reinstatement of the affected individual. The parties agreed upon a settlement agreement on November 12, 2013.

On January 2013, the EEOC filed this lawsuit in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Florida against Bay State Milling Company, alleging violations of the Age Discrimination in Employment Act (ADEA) and the Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA).. The EEOC sought injunctive and monetary relief as well reinstatement of the affected individual. The parties agreed upon a settlement agreement on November 12, 2013.

Using the provided source, generate a concise summary: SECTION SECTION Case SECTION 2 As of 05 06 PM EDT 1 of 29 U.S. District Court District of South Carolina (Charleston) CIVIL DOCKET FOR CASE # 2 CLOSED Michelle H et al v. McMaster et al Assigned to Honorable Richard M Gergel Cause 42 1983 Civil Rights Act SECTION PlaintiffSECTION Michelle H by her next friend Tamara Coppinger Date Filed Date Terminated Jury Demand None Nature of Suit 440 Civil Rights Other Jurisdiction Federal Question represented by Aaron Hirsh Finch Children's Rights 88 Pine Street Suite 800 New York, NY 10005 Fax Email [email protected] LEAD ATTORNEY PRO HAC VICE ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED Adam Protheroe SC Appleseed Legal Justice Center PO Box 7187 Columbia, SC 29202 Fax Email [email protected] LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED Christina Wilson Remlin Children's Rights 88 Pine Street Suite 800 New York, NY 10005 Fax Email [email protected] LEAD ATTORNEY PRO HAC VICE ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED Ira P Lustbader Children's Rights 330 7th Avenue 4th Floor New York, NY 10001 Fax Email [email protected] LEAD ATTORNEY PRO HAC VICE ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED Kathryn Anne Wood Children's Rights 330 7th Avenue 4th Floor New York, NY 10001 SECTION Case SECTION 2 As of 05 06 PM EDT 2 of 29 Fax Email [email protected] LEAD ATTORNEY PRO HAC VICE Matthew T Richardson Wyche PA 807 Gervais Street Suite 301 Columbia, SC 29201 Fax Email [email protected] LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED Sarah Teresa Russo Children's Rights 330 7th Avenue 4th Floor New York, NY 10001 Fax Email [email protected] LEAD ATTORNEY PRO HAC VICE Shereen Arthur White Children's Rights 88 Pine Street Suite 800 New York, NY 10005 Fax Email [email protected] LEAD ATTORNEY PRO HAC VICE ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED Stephanie Marie Persson Children's Rights 88 Pine Street Suite 800 New York, NY 10005 Fax Email [email protected] LEAD ATTORNEY PRO HAC VICE ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED Steve Suggs SC Appleseed Legal Justice Center PO Box 7187 Columbia, SC 29202 Fax Email [email protected] LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED Susan Beth Berkowitz SC Appleseed Legal Justice Center PO Box 7187 SECTION Case SECTION 2 As of 05 06 PM EDT 3 of 29 SECTION PlaintiffSECTION AR by her next friend Tamara Coppinger Columbia, SC 29202 Fax Email [email protected] LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED represented by Aaron Hirsh Finch (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY PRO HAC VICE ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED Adam Protheroe (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED Christina Wilson Remlin (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY PRO HAC VICE ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED Ira P Lustbader (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY PRO HAC VICE ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED Kathryn Anne Wood (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY PRO HAC VICE Matthew T Richardson (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED Sarah Teresa Russo (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY PRO HAC VICE Shereen Arthur White (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY PRO HAC VICE ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED Stephanie Marie Persson (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY PRO HAC VICE ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED Steve Suggs (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED Susan Beth Berkowitz SECTION Case SECTION 2 As of 05 06 PM EDT 4 of 29 SECTION PlaintiffSECTION ZL by her next friend Deborah Wilson (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED represented by Aaron Hirsh Finch (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY PRO HAC VICE ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED Adam Protheroe (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED Christina Wilson Remlin (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY PRO HAC VICE ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED Ira P Lustbader (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY PRO HAC VICE ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED Kathryn Anne Wood (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY PRO HAC VICE Matthew T Richardson (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED Sarah Teresa Russo (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY PRO HAC VICE She Summary: On January 12, 2015, a class action lawsuit was filed against the South Carolina Department of Social Services (SCDSS) in the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina, alleging numerous deficiencies in the operation of the state's child welfare system. On September 28, 2015, the parties reached an interim settlement agreement, providing for an end to certain SCDSS practices, as well as for studies of additional SCDSS practices. Monitoring revealed incremental improvements in conditions, and the settlement remains in effect.

On January 12, 2015, a class action lawsuit was filed against the South Carolina Department of Social Services (SCDSS) in the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina, alleging numerous deficiencies in the operation of the state's child welfare system. On September 28, 2015, the parties reached an interim settlement agreement, providing for an end to certain SCDSS practices, as well as for studies of additional SCDSS practices. Monitoring revealed incremental improvements in conditions, and the settlement remains in effect.

Using the provided source, generate a concise summary: SECTION CM/ECF LIVE, Ver 3.0 - U.S. District Court, Northern Illinois - Docket... https MASON, TERMED United States District Court Northern District of Illinois - CM/ECF LIVE, Ver 3.0 (Chicago) CIVIL DOCKET FOR CASE # 1 EEOC v. HQ Global Workplaces Assigned to Hon. James B. Zagel Demand $0 Cause 42 12101 Americans with Disabilities Act Date Filed Date Terminated Jury Demand SECTION PlaintiffSECTION Nature of Suit 442 Civil Rights Jobs Jurisdiction U.S. Government SECTION PlaintiffSECTION SECTION PlaintiffSECTION Equal Employment Opportunity Commission represented by June Wallace Calhoun United States Equal Employment Opportunity Commission 500 West Madison Street Suite 2800 Chicago, IL 60661 (312) Email [email protected] LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED Deborah Lois Hamilton Equal Employment Opportunity Commission 500 W. Madison Street 2800 Chicago, IL 60661 Email [email protected] ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED Gregory M. Gochanour United States Equal Employment Opportunity Commission 500 West Madison Street Suite 2800 Chicago, IL 60661 (312) Email [email protected] ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED John C. Hendrickson United States Equal Employment Opportunity Commission 500 West Madison Street Suite 2800 1 of 4 2 57 PM CM/ECF LIVE, Ver 3.0 - U.S. District Court, Northern Illinois - Docket... https V. SECTION DefendantSECTION HQ Global Workplaces, Inc. Chicago, IL 60661 (312) Fax (312) Email [email protected] ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED represented by Peter Andrew Steinmeyer Epstein, Becker & Green 150 North Michigan Avenue Suite 420 Chicago, IL 60601 (312) Email [email protected] LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED Jason A Schmidt Epstein, Becker & Green 150 North Michigan Avenue 35th Floor Chicago, IL 60601 (312) Email [email protected] Michael P Butler Epstein, Becker & Green 150 North Michigan Avenue Suite 420 Chicago, IL 60601 (312) Email [email protected] ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED Date Filed # Docket Text 1 COMPLAINT; jury demand - Civil cover sheet - Appearance(s) of John C. Hendrickson, Gregory M. Gochanour, June Wallace Carson as attorney(s) for plaintiff ( No summons(es) issued.) ( Documents 1-1 through 1-3) (cdy) (Entered 2 WAIVER of service of summons as to defendant sent on (cdy) (Entered 3 ANSWER by defendant to complaint 1-1 (cdy) (Entered 2 of 4 2 57 PM CM/ECF LIVE, Ver 3.0 - U.S. District Court, Northern Illinois - Docket... https 4 ATTORNEY APPEARANCE for defendant by Peter A. Steinmeyer, Michael P. Butler (cdy) (Entered 5 CORPORATE disclosure statement by defendant (cdy) (Entered 6 ATTORNEY APPEARANCE for defendant by Jake Schmidt (cdy) (Entered 7 MOTION by plaintiff for entry of appearance ; Notice (cdy) (Entered 8 MINUTE ORDER of by Hon. James B. Zagel SECTION PlaintiffSECTION's motion for entry of appearance 7-1, is granted. Telephoned notice (cdy) (Entered 9 ATTORNEY APPEARANCE for plaintiff by Deborah Lois Hamilton (cdy) (Entered 10 MOTION by plaintiff for settlement conference ; Notice (cdy) (Entered 12 MOTION by defendant to compel the EEOC to produce adequate discovery responses, and for sanctions ; Memorandum in support; Notice (cdy) (Entered 13 RESPONSE by defendant to EEOC's motion for settlement conference 10-1 (cdy) (Entered 14 APPENDIX filed by defendant to motion to compel the EEOC to produce adequate discovery responses 12-1, and for sanctions 12-2 (cdy) (Entered 11 RESPONSE by plaintiff to defendant's motion to compel requesting a briefing schedule (cdy) (Entered 15 MINUTE ORDER of 4/3/03 by Hon. James B. Zagel Answer brief to defendant's motion to compel the EEOC to produce adequate discovery responses 12-1 and for sanctions 12-2 due motion. SECTION PlaintiffSECTION's motion for settlement conference 10-1, is granted. Mailed notice (cdy) (Entered 16 JOINT MOTION by the parties to dismiss with prejudice ; Notice (cdy) (Entered 17 MINUTE ORDER of 5/1/03 by Hon. James B. Zagel This case is dismissed with prejudice and without costs by agreement. Joint motion to dismiss with prejudice 16-1, is granted terminating case. (Entered Agreed Order of Dismissal.) Mailed notice (cdy) (Entered 3 of 4 PACER Service Center Transaction Receipt 14 59 26 2 57 PM CM/ECF LIVE, Ver 3.0 - U.S. District Court, Northern Illinois - Docket... https PACER Login hs0328 Client Code eeoc++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ Description Docket Report Search Criteria 1 Billable Pages 2 Cost 0.16 4 of 4 2 57 PM Summary: In September 2002, the Chicago District Office of the EEOC filed this lawsuit against HQ Global Workplaces, Inc. in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Illinois alleging discrimination on the basis of disability and retaliation in violation of the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990. Specifically, the EEOC alleged that the defendant maintained policies on leave and part-time status availability precluding reasonable accommodation in violation of the ADA, terminated complainant based on her disability, and disciplined complainant's manager for providing complainant with a reasonable accommodation. Following some discovery, the parties jointly dismissed the lawsuit in May 2003.

In September 2002, the Chicago District Office of the EEOC filed this lawsuit against HQ Global Workplaces, Inc. in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Illinois alleging discrimination on the basis of disability and retaliation in violation of the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990. Specifically, the EEOC alleged that the defendant maintained policies on leave and part-time status availability precluding reasonable accommodation in violation of the ADA, terminated complainant based on her disability, and disciplined complainant's manager for providing complainant with a reasonable accommodation. Following some discovery, the parties jointly dismissed the lawsuit in May 2003.

Using the provided source, generate a concise summary: SECTION BROKEN PROMISE FINAL REPORT OF THE BUREAU DIRECTOR’S ADVISORY PANEL ON LEAST RESTRICTIVE ENVIRONMENT FOLLOWING GASKIN V. DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION SEPTEMBER, 2010 Prepared by Martin Elks, Ph.D. Panel Chair June 3, 2010 Least Restrictive Environment Final Report CONTENTS Preface 3 Introduction 4 Implementation Findings IV.1 Policy Development and Implementation 5 IV.2 Advisory Panel 9 IV.3 IEP Format 17 IV.4 Compliance Monitoring 19 IV.5 Complaint Resolution 32 IV.6 Plan Approval 32 IV.7 Training 33 IV.8 Advocacy 38 IV.9 Financial Terms 39 IV.10 Enforcement and Other Terms 39 Conclusion 40 Figure Number of Improvement Plan Activities by Theme 47 Table 1 Contrast Between PDE and Panel Regarding LRE Monitoring 48 Table 2 Levels of Implementation of Settlement Agreement 49 Table 3 Contrast Between Panel Priorities and PDE Initiatives 50 Table 4 Disability Category Child Count, December 1, 2009 51 Table 5 Tier 1 School Districts, 52 Appendix 1 Recommendations Made at June, 3, 2010 Panel Meeting 57 Appendix 2 Statistical Summary of LRE in Pennsylvania 58 2 Least Restrictive Environment Final Report PREFACE Sixteen years is a long time. On June 30, 1994, Lydia Gaskin and eleven other students filed a federal lawsuit in which their parents alleged that the Pennsylvania Department of Education was violating their right to a Free Appropriate Public Education (FAPE) in the Least Restrictive Environment (LRE). Eleven years later this class action lawsuit was concluded in a Settlement Agreement (SA). This SA represented an agreement on behalf of PDE to implement a set of provisions designed to increase the number of students included in regular education classrooms and the benefit they received from education in the least restrictive environment in Pennsylvania. Pennsylvania has therefore, from 1994 to 2010, been dealing with the issue of LRE for students with disabilities, first in litigation and then through a settlement agreement. In 2009 there were children with disabilities receiving special education in Pennsylvania (www.penndata.hbg.psu.edu). This lawsuit, spanning 16 years, has therefore covered the entire school careers of many thousands of students with disabilities. For example, this report writer’s daughter, who has Down Syndrome, was in pre-school when this lawsuit began. She is now a high school senior. In fact, taken together, 3.84 million student IEP years have been completed under the time span of this lawsuit, 1.2 million student IEP years have passed just in the time of the SA. The implementation of this SA was therefore a large undertaking and an even bigger responsibility. The SA embodied a vision for change in Pennsylvania that affected thousands of students and their families. PDE agreed to implement the provisions of this SA to achieve the promise of more inclusive education in Pennsylvania. This promise has not been realized. Not only was the implementation of the SA minimal or absent in many key provisions but several groups of students show little if any change in LRE during the life of the SA. This report could have been a celebration. Instead, it is a metaphor of what is wrong in Pennsylvania with education in the least restrictive environment for students with disabilities. 3 Least Restrictive Environment Final Report INTRODUCTION The department of Education is committed to fulfilling the terms of the agreement and is pleased to put more than 11 years of litigation behind and move forward for the sake of the affected children and their families. Abe Amoros, Department spokesperson, September, 2005 On September 19, 2005, Judge Eduardo Robreno of the Eastern District Court of Pennsylvania granted the motion for final approval of the Settlement Agreement in Gaskin v. Pennsylvania, ending 11 years of litigation regarding the education of students with disabilities in the least restrictive environment with supplementary aids and services in their neighborhood schools. Among the 50+ provisions of the Settlemen Summary: A lawsuit was filed on behalf of all school-age students with disabilities in Pennsylvania seeking to increase the number of children with disabilities educated with their non-disabled peers, and to make sure schools provided real supports to make sure inclusion would work as required by the IDEA. After eleven years, the parties reached a settlement; however, the final report demonstrates many of the terms of the agreement was not met.

A lawsuit was filed on behalf of all school-age students with disabilities in Pennsylvania seeking to increase the number of children with disabilities educated with their non-disabled peers, and to make sure schools provided real supports to make sure inclusion would work as required by the IDEA. After eleven years, the parties reached a settlement; however, the final report demonstrates many of the terms of the agreement was not met.

Using the provided source, generate a concise summary: SECTION IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLORADO Civil Action No. COLORADO CROSS-DISABILITY COALITION and SHARON BROWN-JODOIN, LEO D. JODOIN, CAROLYN INAGAKI, COLLEEN GALLOWAY, CHARLES GALLOWAY, STEVE MERTZ, IAN WATLINGTON, SUSAN WATLINGTON, ADAM DENNIS, TERI CHRISTOPHER, KEVIN SMITH, LAUREN WINTER, and KIM KELLER for themselves and all other similarly situated, SECTION PlaintiffSECTION s, v. FEY CONCERT COMPANY, a Colorado General Partnership, UNIVERSAL CONCERTS, INC., a California Corporation and General Partner of Fey Concert Company, EVERY DOG HAS ITS DAY, INC., a Colorado Corporation and General Partner of Fey Concert Company, and THE MUSEUM OF OUTDOOR ARTS, a Colorado Nonprofit Corporation, SECTION DefendantSECTION s. CLASS SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT RECITALS 1. Parties. The parties to this Agreement are Universal Concerts Company, f/k/a Fey Concert Company, a Colorado General Partnership ( Fey ) Universal Concerts, Inc., a California Corporation and General Partner of Universal Concerts Company ( Universal ), Every Dog Has its Day, Inc. a Colorado corporation and a former General Partner of Fey Concerts, ( Every Dog ) and The Museum of Outdoor Arts, a Colorado nonprofit corporation ( MOA ), (collectively SECTION DefendantSECTION s ) on the one hand and Colorado Cross-Disability Coalition, and Sharon Brown-Jodoin, Leo Jodoin, Carolyn Inagaki, Colleen Galloway, Charles Galloway, Steve Mertz, Ian Watlington, Susan Watlington, Adam Dennis, Teri Christopher, Kevin Smith, Lauren Winter and Kim Keller, (collectively SECTION PlaintiffSECTION s ) and a class of persons further defined below. EXHIBIT 1 2. Nature of litigation. SECTION PlaintiffSECTION s filed an action in the United States District Court for the District of Colorado as Civil Action No. (the Litigation ) alleging both individual and class action claims. In the complaint, SECTION PlaintiffSECTION s allege that in connection with the operation of Fiddler's Green Amphitheater ( Fiddler's Green ), SECTION DefendantSECTION s have violated the Americans with Disabilities Act and The Colorado Anti-Discrimination Act ( CADA ) as to the class, and that Fey, Universal and Every Dog have violated the Colorado Consumer Protection Act and engaged in common law negligent misrepresentation, fraud and fraudulent concealment as to the individually named SECTION PlaintiffSECTION s. 3. Denial of Liability. SECTION DefendantSECTION s deny any liability to SECTION PlaintiffSECTION s or the class and have asserted a number of defenses to the complaint in the Litigation. Nevertheless, SECTION DefendantSECTION s consider it desirable that the Litigation and the claims alleged therein be settled upon the terms and conditions set forth in this Agreement, in order to avoid further expense and burdensome, protracted litigation, and to put to rest all claims that have been or might be asserted by the SECTION PlaintiffSECTION s or the class arising out of or related to the subject matter of the Litigation. 4. The class desires to settle its claims against SECTION DefendantSECTION s, having taken into account through its counsel the risks, delay and difficulties involved in establishing a right to recovery in excess of that offered by this settlement and the likelihood that the Litigation will be further protracted and expensive. 5. SECTION PlaintiffSECTION s have made certain representations to counsel for the SECTION DefendantSECTION s concerning the composition of the class. Specifically, it has been represented that the class meets the numerousity and other requirements of Fed. R. Civ. P. 6. Counsel for the class have investigated the facts available to them and the law. 7. Based on the foregoing, and upon an analysis of the benefits which this Agreement affords the class, counsel for the class considers it to be in the best interest of the class to enter into this Agreement. 2 8. In consideration of the foregoing and other good and valuable consideration. it is stipulated and agreed by and between SECTION PlaintiffSECTION s, counsel for the class, and the SECTION DefendantSECTION s that the claims of the named SECTION PlaintiffSECTION s and of the class against SECTION DefendantSECTION s be and are hereby compromised and settled, subject to the approval of the Court, upon the following terms and conditions. TERMS 9. Certification of settlement class. For purposes of settlement only, SECTION DefendantSECTION s stipulate to the certification ofa class ( the class ) under Fed. R. Civ. P. which class shall consist of persons who satisfy either of the following subclass criteria a. All persons with permanent disabilities who use wheelchairs or electric carts for mobility who have been denied full and equal enjoyment of the services, facilities, privileges, advantages and accommodations of Fiddler's Green on the basis of disability and; b. All persons with a relationship or association with members of the foregoing subclass who, as a result of such relationship or association, have been denied full and equal enjoyment of the services, facilities, privileges, advantages and accommodations of Fiddler's Green. 10. This stipulation is for purposes of settlement only. If this settlement is not approved by the Court or does not become effective for any reason, SECTION DefendantSECTION s retain the right to object to the maintenance of the action as a class action. 11. Relief to class. SECTION DefendantSECTION s agree to provide relief to the class as follows a. SECTION DefendantSECTION s shall cause capital improvements to be made to Fiddler's Green as set forth in Exhibit A hereto according to the time frames set forth in Exhibit A hereto. The SECTION DefendantSECTION s will not place equipment or other obstructions in the designated wheelchair seating areas. b. SECTION DefendantSECTION s pledge to contribute five cents per paid admission for all outlet and telephone ticket sales from each concert at Fiddler's Green produced and promoted by Universal Concerts Company during the 1998 concert season, to a fund which shall not be less than Fifteen Thousand Dollars with such funds to be used to pay each class member a maximum of One Hundred 3 Seventy-Five Dollars In the event that the total amount payable to the class members is less than the amount in the fund the balance of the fund shall be paid to The Colorado Cross-Disability Coalition. c. Each class member shall receive payment by check of the appropriate amount not to exceed One Hundred Seventy-Five Dollars pursuant to paragraph 11 (b) above, depending on the number of members of the class and the size of the fund. 12. Subject to approval of the Court, the payments to class members from the settlement fund shall be made within 60 days of the end of the 1998 concert season at Fiddler's Green, or within 60 days after final approval by the Court of the settlement and any appeal, whichever is later. The funds for such payments shall be paid to SECTION PlaintiffSECTION s' counsel by SECTION DefendantSECTION s by a check payable to SECTION PlaintiffSECTION s' counsel's trust account. SECTION PlaintiffSECTION s' counsel shall disburse the payments to the class members who submit a completed and notarized Claim Form attached hereto as Exhibit B. If any such settlement funds remain in the trust account after all class members have been paid, such monies shall be paid to the Colorado Cross-Disability Coalition. SECTION PlaintiffSECTION s' counsel will confer with SECTION DefendantSECTION s' counsel before checks are issued to the class members. SECTION DefendantSECTION s shall be entitled to a copy, at their expense of the Claim Forms received by SECTION PlaintiffSECTION s' counsel. In the event that a class member who is entitled to a check is deceased, SECTION DefendantSECTION s shall be released if SECTION PlaintiffSECTION s' counsel has sent a check to the person whom they reasonably believe to have been the class member, notwithstanding the failure to comply with laws relating to probate and marital property. If any check is not cashed within ninety (90) days the monies represented thereby shall be returned to the fund described in paragraph 11 (b) above and SECTION DefendantSECTION s shall not have any further payment obligation to the payee. If any check is returned by the United States Postal Service indicating address unknown or otherwise indicating that the check cannot be delivered, SECTION DefendantSECTION s shall not have any further payment obligation to that class member. 4 13. Subject to approval of the Court, SECTION DefendantSECTION s will pay named SECTION PlaintiffSECTION s. Sharon Brown-Jodoin, Leo Jodoin, Carolyn Inagaki, Colleen Galloway, Charles Galloway, Steve Mertz, Ian Watlington, Susan Watlington, Adam Dennis, Teri Christopher, Kevin Smith, Lauren Winter and Kim Keller, the sum of One Thousand Seven Hundred Fifty Dollars each as an incentive award. In the event that a named SECTION PlaintiffSECTION s is deceased, SECTION DefendantSECTION s shall be released if SECTION PlaintiffSECTION s' counsel has sent a check to the person whom they reasonably believe to be the named SECTION PlaintiffSECTION, notwithstanding the failure to comply with laws relating to probate and marital property. If any check is not cashed within ninety (90) days, the monies represented thereby shall be returned to the SECTION DefendantSECTION s and the SECTION DefendantSECTION s shall not have any further obligation to the payee. The incentive payments referenced in paragraph 18 below shall be made within 60 days after final approval by the Court of the settlement and any appeal. The funds for such payments shall be paid to SECTION PlaintiffSECTION s' counsel by SECTION DefendantSECTION s by a check payable to SECTION PlaintiffSECTION s' counsel's trust account. SECTION PlaintiffSECTION s' counsel shall disburse the incentive payments to the named SECTION PlaintiffSECTION s from such trust account and shall account to SECTION DefendantSECTION s for all such disbursements. If it is not possible for any of the named SECTION PlaintiffSECTION s to receive his or her incentive payment, any funds remaining in such trust account shall be reimbursed to the SECTION DefendantSECTION s. 14. Release. The named SECTION PlaintiffSECTION s, and each class member not opting out, shall, as of the effective date of this settlement, be deemed to release and discharge forever SECTION DefendantSECTION s and their current and former officers, directors, successors, predecessors, partners, joint venturers, sister companies, executors, administrators, assigns, shareholders, affiliated companies, parents, subsidiaries, employees, attorneys and agents ( Released Parties ), from all claims, known and unknown, irrespective of legal theory, that have been or could have been asserted by SECTION PlaintiffSECTION s or the class including but not limited to claims or causes of action arising from or under the American with Disabilities Act or the CADA whether in contract or tort, arising under or by virtue of any existing regulation or judicial decision, including but not limited to actual damages, 5 exemplary and punitive damages, penalties of any kind and prejudgment and post judgment interest (collectively Claims ) which have accrued or may ever accrue to SECTION PlaintiffSECTION s, their successors or assigns based upon, in connection with or arising out of the allegations and causes of action as set forth in the Litigation, including but not limited to Claims arising from or under the Americans with Disabilities Act or the CADA as related to Fiddler's Green and/or the capital improvements set forth above in paragraph 11 (a) existing at any time prior to the date hereof. 15. Effective date. This Agreement shall become effective upon the occurrence or happening of all of the following events a. The Court's entry of a final judgment approving this Agreement as fair, reasonable and adequate to the class; finding that this agreement is fair and made in good faith, thereby barring any potential claims for contribution against SECTION DefendantSECTION s by other persons and entities; dismissing the claims of SECTION PlaintiffSECTION s and the class against SECTION DefendantSECTION s with prejudice and without cost; and directing entry ofjudgment approving the settlement. b. The expiration of ten days after the time the final judgment becomes a final order not subject to appeal, or, if an appeal has been sought, the expiration of five days after the final disposition of any such appeal, which disposition approves the Court's final judgment, the transactions contemplated therein, and the consummation of the settlement in accordance with the terms and provisions of this Agreement. 16. If this Agreement is not approved by the Court or for any reason does not become effective, it shall be deemed null and void and shall be without prejudice to any right of any party hereto and shall not be used in any subsequent proceedings in this or any other litigation, or in any manner whatsoever. 17. Attorney's Fees and Costs through February 17, 1998. In addition to the benefits described above, SECTION DefendantSECTION s will pay counsel for the class the sum of to cover all fees, costs and expenses up to and including February 17, 1998. SECTION DefendantSECTION will not oppose or cause to be opposed an application for such amount for such time period. 6 18. Attorney's Fee, Costs and Related Matters post- February 17, 1998. SECTION DefendantSECTION s will also pay class counsel an amount to cover counsel for the class's reasonable fees, costs and expenses from February 18, 1998 up to and including the date of this Agreement and an amount to cover their reasonable fees, costs and expenses for post-Agreement work, including but not limited to, application for approval of the settlement, administering the settlement, and related matters. The parties have not been able to agree, to date, on such amounts. They parties will submit such unresolved issues to the Court. 19. Notice. Counsel for the class will give notice by publication to the class members, as further described below. 20. Maximum liability of SECTION DefendantSECTION s. In no event shall the total liability of SECTION DefendantSECTION s under this Agreement exceed the total of the settlement fund described in paragraph 11 (b) plus the incentive payments to the named SECTION PlaintiffSECTION s described in paragraph 13, plus attorney's fees and costs described in paragraphs 17 and 18 plus the cost of capital improvements to Fiddler's Green described in paragraph 11(a) and the costs for notice. 21. Class Members' Right of Exclusion. Any class member may seek to be excluded from this Agreement and from the class within the time and in the manner provided by Court order. Any class member so excluded shall not be bound by the terms of this Agreement nor entitled to any of its benefits. In the event five percent (5%)or more of the class members elect to be excluded from this Agreement, it may be declared null and void, at the sole election of the SECTION DefendantSECTION s. 22. Preliminary approval. As soon as practical after execution of this Agreement, the parties shall make application to the Court for an order which a. Preliminarily approves this Agreement; b. Certifies for purposes of settlement only that the class claims may be maintained on behalf of the class defined above; 7 c. Schedules a hearing for final approval of this agreement by the Court; d. Approves the form of notice to the class, to be made by publication by SECTION PlaintiffSECTION s' counsel at SECTION DefendantSECTION s' expense for two successive weeks in two publications of general circulation of the class members, e.g., The Denver Post and The Rocky Mountain News; e. Finds that such class notice is the only notice required and that such notice satisfies the requirements of due process and Fed. R. Civ. P. 23. 23. The parties agree to request Court approval of the form of notice by publication and the form of notice to persons who request information pursuant to the notice by publication that are attached hereto as Exhibit C and D respectively, and the form of Preliminary Approval Order attached hereto as Exhibit E. The fact that the Court may require changes in the notices or order shall not invalidate this Agreement so long as such changes do not materially conflict with its terms. 24. Final approval. At the conclusion of, or as soon as practicable after the closing of the hearing on the fairness, reasonableness and adequacy of this Agreement, counsel for the class and SECTION DefendantSECTION s shall request that the court enter a Final Judgment approving the terms of this Agreement as fair, reasonable and adequate, providing for the implementation of those terms and provisions, finding that the notice given to the class satisfies the requirements of due and process and Fed. R. Civ. P. 23, dismissing the claims of the class and the named SECTION PlaintiffSECTION s with prejudice and without costs, directing the entry ofjudgment, and retaining jurisdiction to enforce the provisions of this Agreement. 25. The parties agree to request Court approval of the form of Judgment attached hereto as Exhibit F. The fact that the Court may require changes in the Judgment shall not invalidate this Agreement so long as such changes do not materially conflict with its terms. 26. Release of Attorney's Lien. In consideration of this Agreement, SECTION PlaintiffSECTION s' counsel hereby waive, discharge and release SECTION DefendantSECTION s, their officers, directors, shareholders, agents, employees, attorneys, successors, beneficiaries, parents, subsidiaries, representatives, divisions, 8 affiliates and assigns of and from any and all claims for attorney's fees, by lien or otherwise, for legal services rendered by SECTION PlaintiffSECTION s' counsel in connection with this case. SECTION PlaintiffSECTION s' counsel further represent and certify that no other person is entitled to any sum for attorney's fees in connection with same, and the undersigned attorneys agree to indemnify and to save harmless SECTION DefendantSECTION s and their officers, directors, shareholders, agents, employees, attorneys, successors, beneficiaries, parents, subsidiaries, representatives, divisions, affiliates and assigns, if any person shall assert any claim for attorney's fees in connection with the foregoing matter. 27. Miscellaneous Provisions. Whether or not this Agreement and the settlement contemplated hereunder are consummated, this Agreement and the proceedings had in connection herewith shall in no event be construed as, or be deemed to be, evidence of an admission or concession on the part of SECTION DefendantSECTION s of (a) any liability or wrongdoing whatsoever or (b) the appropriateness of class treatment of the claims and matters raised in the complaint in the Litigation. 28. The parties and their attorneys agree to cooperate fully with one another in seeking Court approval of this Agreement, and to use their best efforts to effect the consummation of this Agreement and the settlement provided for herein. 29. Notices regarding this Agreement directed to the class shall be sent to Timothy P. Fox, Esq. Fox & Robertson, P.C. 1675 Larimer Street Suite 610 Denver, CO 80202 Notices regarding this Agreement directed to the SECTION DefendantSECTION s shall be sent to Daniel S. Hoffman, Esq. Barbara Z. Blumenthal, Esq. McKenna & Cuneo, L.L.P. 370 Seventeenth Street Suite 4800 9 Denver, CO 80202 and Adam Friedman V.P. Business Affairs Universal Concerts, Inc. 100 Universal City Universal City, CA 91608 The persons and addresses designated in this paragraph may be changed by any signatory hereto by written notice to the other signatories hereto. 30. The foregoing constitutes the entire agreement between the parties with regard to the subject matter hereof and may only be modified or amended in a writing signed by all parties hereto. 31. This Agreement may be executed in counterparts, in which case the various counterparts shall be and constitute one instrument for all purposes. The several signature pages may be collected and annexed to one or more documents to form a complete counterpart. Photocopies of executed copies of this Agreement may be treated as originals. 32. Each and every term of this Agreement shall be binding upon and inure to the benefit of SECTION PlaintiffSECTION s, the members of the class, and any of their successors and personal representatives, and shall bind and shall inure to the benefit of the Released Parties, all of which persons and entities are intended to be beneficiaries of this Agreement. 33. This Agreement and the exhibits annexed hereto shall be governed by and interpreted in accordance with the laws of the State of Colorado, except to the extent that the laws of the State of Colorado are pre-empted by the laws of the United States. 10 Summary: Disabled patrons of a concert venue filed a class action against the owners and operators of the venue for failure to remove barriers to access. The parties settled, with Defendants agreeing not to obstruct wheelchair areas and to pay damages and attorneys' fees and costs.

Disabled patrons of a concert venue filed a class action against the owners and operators of the venue for failure to remove barriers to access. The parties settled, with Defendants agreeing not to obstruct wheelchair areas and to pay damages and attorneys' fees and costs.

Using the provided source, generate a concise summary: SECTION CLOSED U.S. District Court Eastern District of Oklahoma (Muskogee) CIVIL DOCKET FOR CASE # 6 USA v. Sulphur OK City of Assigned to Judge Frank H. Seay Demand $0 Cause 42 2000e Job Discrimination (Employment) Date Filed Jury Demand SECTION PlaintiffSECTION Nature of Suit 440 Civil Rights Other Jurisdiction U.S. Government SECTION PlaintiffSECTION SECTION PlaintiffSECTION United States of America represented by Allen W. Levy U.S. Department of Justice/Civil Rights Div. P.O. Box 65968 Washington, DC (202) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED Bill Lann Lee Asst Attorney General/Civil Rights Div 950 Pennsylvania Ave. N.W. Room 5643 Washington, DC 20530 (202) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED Sheldon J. Sperling US Attorney (EDOK) 1200 W Okmulgee Muskogee, OK 74401 Fax Email [email protected] LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED V. SECTION DefendantSECTION The City of Sulphur, Oklahoma William B. Fenton U.S. Department of Justice/Civil Rights Div. P.O. Box 65968 Washington, DC (202) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED Date Filed # Docket Text 1 COMPLAINT (nsb, Deputy Clerk) (Entered MAGISTRATE'S CONSENT FORM furnished to plaintiff's counsel. (nsb, Deputy Clerk) (Entered WAIVER OF SERVICE FORMS furnished to plaintiff's counsel (nsb, Deputy Clerk) (Entered 2 NOTICE mailed setting case for Status & Scheduling Conference on 3/1/01 at 12 00 Noon at the United States Courthouse, Muskogee, Oklahoma before the Honorable Frank H. Seay. ENTERING ORDER by Judge Frank H. Seay directing parties pursuant to Local Rule 26(e) to meet as soon as practicable but not less than 14 days prior to the Status and Conference to discuss the nature and basis of claims and defenses, the possibility of prompt settlement and, consent to proceed before a United States Magistrate Judge. Parties are directed to file with the Clerk of Court a joint written report of such meeting four (4) working days prior to the Status and Scheduling Conference. Attorneys shall make known to their clients the contents of the report. The enclosed Report on Planning Meeting Form, is to be completed and filed with the Clerk. All parties and their counsel are required to sign this form. The signatures of the parties may be submitted by facsimile. (FHS) (cc all counsel) (law, Deputy Clerk) (Entered 3 MOTION (Unopposed) by plaintiff for a continuance of status and scheduling conference ; response deadline 3/8/01 (law, Deputy Clerk) (Entered 4 BRIEF by plaintiff in support of the United States' unopposed motion for continuance (law, Deputy Clerk) (Entered 5 MINUTE ORDER granting Unopposed motion for a continuance of status and scheduling conference. 3-1 ; Status and scheduling conference is stricken from 3/1/01 (FHS) (cc all counsel) (trl, Deputy Clerk) (Entered 6 CONSENT DECREE by Judge Frank H. Seay (cc all counsel) (tkc, Deputy Clerk) (Entered 7 MINUTE ORDER A consent decree resolving all matters in issue having been entered on February 23, 2001, there is no reason at this time to maintain the file as an open file for statistical purposes. Accordingly, the clerk is instructed to submit a JS-6 form to the Administrative Office. Nothing contained in this minute entry order shall be interpreted as a dismissal of this case or the complaint. Should further proceedings become necessary or desirable, any party may initiate proceedings by filing the appropriate motion in the same manner as if the form JS-6 had not been submitted (closing case) (FHS) (cc all counsel) (tkc, Deputy Clerk) (Entered PACER Service Center Transaction Receipt 14 20 50 PACER Login wu0079 Client Code Baker Description Docket Report Search Criteria 6 Billable Pages 2 Cost 0.16 Summary: On January 18, 2001, the U.S. Department of Justice ( D.O.J. ) filed a lawsuit under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 against the City of Sulphur in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Oklahoma alleging that the City discriminated against a Mexican-American employee on the basis of his national origin, when it failed or refused to promote him and took no action to remedy the effects of discrimination. The D.O.J. sought injunctive and monetary relief. On February 23, 2001, the Court entered a consent decree, containing injunctions on discrimination and retaliation, with orders to the defendant to implement a nondiscriminatory policy and antidiscrimination training. The individual received The decree expired after five years.

On January 18, 2001, the U.S. Department of Justice ( D.O.J. ) filed a lawsuit under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 against the City of Sulphur in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Oklahoma alleging that the City discriminated against a Mexican-American employee on the basis of his national origin, when it failed or refused to promote him and took no action to remedy the effects of discrimination. The D.O.J. sought injunctive and monetary relief. On February 23, 2001, the Court entered a consent decree, containing injunctions on discrimination and retaliation, with orders to the defendant to implement a nondiscriminatory policy and antidiscrimination training. The individual received The decree expired after five years.

Using the provided source, generate a concise summary: SECTION U.S. District Court Eastern District of Michigan (Detroit) CIVIL DOCKET FOR CASE # 2 CLOSED Center For Community Access, Incorporated v. Detroit, City of Assigned to District Judge Gerald E. Rosen Referred to Magistrate Judge Paul J. Komives Cause No cause code entered Special Master Robert G. Scott 3770 Ridge Mill Drive Columbus, OH 43026 (614) Date Filed Date Terminated Jury Demand SECTION DefendantSECTION Nature of Suit 440 Civil Rights Other Jurisdiction Federal Question SECTION PlaintiffSECTION Center For Community Access, Incorporated represented by Denise M. Heberle Heberle & Finnegan 2580 Craig Road Ann Arbor, MI 48103 Email [email protected] LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED John Mark Finnegan Heberle & Finnegan 2580 Craig Road Ann Arbor, MI 48103 Fax Email [email protected] LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED SECTION PlaintiffSECTION Michigan Paralyzed Veterans of America represented by John Mark Finnegan (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED Denise M. Heberle (See above for address) ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED V. SECTION DefendantSECTION Detroit, City of represented by Andrew R. Jarvis Detroit City Law Department 660 Woodward Avenue Suite 1650 Detroit, MI Fax ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED Jason McFarlane City of Detroit Law Department 2 Woodward Avenue Suite 500 Detroit, MI 48226 Fax Email [email protected] ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED Date Filed # Docket Text 1 COMPLAINT filed by Center For Community Access, Incorporated against Detroit, City of; Receipt No 531050 - Fee $ ) (Entered 2 MOTION to File First Amended Complaint by Center For Community Access, Incorporated. (LHack, ) (Entered 3 FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT filed by Michigan Paralyzed Veterans of America, Center For Community Access, Incorporated against Detroit, City of.(LHack, ) (Entered 4 NOTICE by Michigan Paralyzed Veterans of America of withdrawal of motion to amend complaint. (Heberle, Denise) (Entered 5 ORDER for Michigan Paralyzed Veterans of America, Center For Community Access, Incorporated to Show Cause why LACK OF PROGRESS. Show Cause Response due by Signed by Honorable Gerald E Rosen. (DVin, ) (Entered 6 NOTICE of Appearance by Andrew R. Jarvis on behalf of Detroit, City of. (Jarvis, Andrew) (Entered 7 ANSWER to Amended Complaint with Affirmative Defenses with Jury Demand by Detroit, City of.(Jarvis, Andrew) (Entered 8 CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE by Detroit, City of re 7 Answer to Amended Complaint, 6 Notice of Appearance. (Jarvis, Andrew) (Entered 9 RESPONSE to 5 Order to Show Cause by all plaintiffs. (Heberle, Denise) (Entered 10 NOTICE TO APPEAR Scheduling Conference set for 10 15 AM before Honorable Gerald E Rosen. (LSau, ) (Entered Minute Entry -Scheduling Conference held on before Honorable Gerald E Rosen. (DVin, ) (Entered 11 SCHEDULING ORDER Final Pretrial Conference set for 11 30 AM before Honorable Gerald E Rosen. Dispositive Motion Cut-off set for Trailing Trial Docket set for Signed by Honorable Gerald E Rosen. (Attachments # 1) (Refer to image for additional dates)(DVin, ) (Entered 12 MOTION for Preliminary Injunction and Memorandum in Support by all plaintiffs. (Attachments # 1 Index of Exhibits # 2 Exhibit Declaration of Megan Buffington# 3 Exhibit Declaration of Maurice Jordan# 4 Declaration of Michael Harris# 5 Exhibit Declaration of Carolyn Grawi# 6 Exhibit Detroit City Council Journal Entry March 29, 2006# 7 Exhibit Detroit City Council Journal Entry January 27, 2006# 8 Exhibit Detroit City Council Journal Entry February 15, 2006# 9 Exhibit MDOT Sidewalk Ramp Details Denise) (Entered 13 ORDER Requiring Response to 12 Motion for Preliminary Injunction Response due (see order for details) Signed by Honorable Gerald E Rosen. (LHack, ) (Entered Minute Entry -Status Conference held on before Honorable Gerald E Rosen. (LSau, ) (Entered 14 FIRST SETTLEMENT ORDER and partial settlement. Signed by Honorable Gerald E Rosen. (DPer, ) (Entered 15 MOTION for Contempt by all plaintiffs. (Attachments # 1 letter to attorney Jarvis)(Heberle, Denise) (Entered 16 EXHIBIT 1, CORRECTED re 15 MOTION for Contempt by all plaintiffs.(Heberle, Denise) (Entered 17 MOTION for Attorney Fees and costs for period between March 2, 2004 and July 31, 2006 by all plaintiffs. (Attachments # 1 Exhibit Declaration of J. Mark Finnegan)(Heberle, Denise) (Entered 18 RESPONSE to 15 MOTION for Contempt filed by all defendants. (Jarvis, Andrew) (Entered 19 SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT In Compliance with August 31, 2006 Order by Detroit, City of. (Attachments # 1 Exhibit 1 - DEGC Letter)(Jarvis, Andrew) (Entered 20 RESPONSE to 17 MOTION for Attorney Fees and costs for period between March 2, 2004 and July 31, 2006 filed by all defendants. (Attachments # 1 Exhibit 1 - Ltr to Opposing Counsel Re Tax Info)(Jarvis, Andrew) (Entered 21 City of Detroit First Annual Report REPORT by Detroit, City of. (Attachments # 1 Document Continuation Certification of Cathy Square# 2 Document Continuation Part One - 2006 Street Resurfacing# 3 Document Continuation Part Two - City of Detroit 06 Ramp Report)(Jarvis, Andrew) (Entered 22 NOTICE TO APPEAR Status Conference set for 10 00 AM before Honorable Gerald E Rosen. (LSau) (Entered Minute Entry -Status Conference held on before Honorable Gerald E Rosen. (LSau) (Entered 23 NOTICE TO APPEAR Status Conference set for 10 00 AM before Honorable Gerald E Rosen (LSau) (Entered 24 City of Detroit's April 4, 207 Status Report REPORT by Detroit, City of (Attachments # 1 Exhibit A - Contract for Professional Services# 2 Exhibit B - RFP for Evaluation, Survey, Design and Construction# 3 Exhibit C - Bagley Phase I and Pase II Survey# 4 Exhibit D - Letter of Assurance from DEGC) (Jarvis, Andrew) (Entered 25 SECTION DefendantSECTION City of Detroit's List of Streets/Projects Intended for Resurfacing, Reconstruction or Improvement in Compliance with the August 31, 2006 Order REPORT by Detroit, City of (Jarvis, Andrew) (Entered Set Deadlines/Hearings Telephone Conference set for 10 00 AM before Honorable Gerald E Rosen (LSau) (Entered Minute Entry -Telephone Conference held on before Honorable Gerald E Rosen. (LSau) (Entered 26 Joint MOTION for Attorney Fees by Center For Community Access, Incorporated. (Heberle, Denise) (Entered 27 STIPULATED ORDER re 26 Motion for Attorney Fees. Signed by District Judge Gerald E Rosen. (DOpa) (Entered 28 MOTION for Contempt by Michigan Paralyzed Veterans of America, Center For Community Access, Incorporated. (Heberle, Denise) (Entered 29 RESPONSE to 28 MOTION for Contempt SECTION DefendantSECTION's and Assistant Corporation Counsel Andrew Jarvis and Law Department Employee Pal Brooks filed by Detroit, City of. (Attachments # 1 Index of Exhibits, # 2 Exhibit 1 - Check Request for Payment, # 3 Exhibit 2 - Affidavit of Pal Brooks) (Jarvis, Andrew) (Entered 30 Emergency MOTION for Temporary Restraining Order by Michigan Paralyzed Veterans of America, Center For Community Access, Incorporated. (Attachments # 1 Index of Exhibits, # 2 Exhibit Ex. 1 Declaration of Marguerite Finnegan, # 3 Exhibit Ex. 2 Declaration of Mike Harris, # 4 Exhibit Ex. 3 TRO Photos 1-12, # 5 Exhibit Ex. 4 TRO Photos 13-23) (Finnegan, John) (Entered 31 ORDER DENYING 30 Emergency MOTION for Temporary Restraining Order filed by Center For Community Access, Incorporated, Michigan Paralyzed Veterans of America., ( Status Conference set for 03 00 PM before District Judge Gerald E Rosen) Signed by District Judge Robert H Cleland in the absence of Judge Gerald Rosen. (LWag) (Entered 32 NOTICE TO APPEAR Status Conference set for 10 00 AM before District Judge Gerald E Rosen (LSau) (Entered Minute Entry -Status Conference held on before District Judge Gerald E Rosen. (LSau) (Entered 33 ORDER regarding plaintiffs' motion for order holding defendant in contempt 28. Signed by District Judge Gerald E Rosen. (LSau) (Entered 34 ORDER Appointing Special Master Signed by District Judge Gerald E Rosen. (PPau) (Entered 35 OBJECTION to Portions of the Court's Order Appointing a Special Master Undr FRCP 53(b)1 & Request to Amended Under FRCP 53(b)4 by Detroit, City of. (Jarvis, Andrew) (Entered 36 ORDER regarding defendant's objections to order appointing special master. Signed by District Judge Gerald E Rosen. (LSau) (Entered 37 City of Detroit's Third Annual Report REPORT by Detroit, City of (Attachments # 1 Document Continuation Part 2 of City of Detroit's Third Annual Report) (Jarvis, Andrew) (Entered 38 NOTICE TO APPEAR Status Conference set for 02 00 PM before District Judge Gerald E Rosen (LSau) (Entered Minute Entry -Status Conference held on before District Judge Gerald E Rosen. (LSau) (Entered 39 NOTICE TO APPEAR Status Conference set for 02 00 PM before District Judge Gerald E Rosen (RBri) (Entered Minute Entry -Status Conference held on before District Judge Gerald E Rosen. (RBri) (Entered 40 ORDER DIRECTING DEFENDANT TO PAY ATTORNEY FEES TO PLAINTIFFS' COUNSEL. Signed by District Judge Gerald E Rosen. (RBri) (Entered 41 Ex Parte MOTION for Order To Pay Special Master, Robert Scott's Invoice for the Period of January 24, 2009 through March 31, 2009 by Detroit, City of. (Attachments # 1 Exhibit 1 - Special Master's Invoice) (Jarvis, Andrew) (Entered 42 ORDER DIRECTING DEFENDANT, CITY OF DETROIT, PAY SPECIAL MASTER'S INVOICE FOR PERIOD OF JANUARY 24, 2009 THROUGH MARCH 31, 2009. Re 41 Motion for Order. Signed by District Judge Gerald E Rosen. (RBri) (Entered 43 Ex Parte MOTION for Order to Pay Special Master, Robert Scott's Invoice for the Period of April 2, 2009 through June 30, 2009 by Detroit, City of. (Attachments # 1 Exhibit Master Invoice for 4/09 - 6/09) (Jarvis, Andrew) (Entered 44 ORDER DIRECTING DEFENDANT, CITY OF DETROIT, TO PAY THE SPECIAL MASTER'S INVOICE FOR PERIOD OF APRIL 2, 2009 THROUGH JUNE 30, 2009 re 43 Motion for Order. Signed by District Judge Gerald E Rosen. (RBri) (Entered 45 NOTICE TO APPEAR Status Conference set for 02 00 PM before District Judge Gerald E Rosen (RBri) (Entered 46 Ex Parte MOTION Court issue an Order that the City of Detroit pay the Special Masters Invoice for the period July 3, 2009, through August 30, 2009. And that this order reflect that be paid within 14 days of the entry of this order by Detroit, City of. (Attachments # 1 Exhibit Speical Master's Invoice) (Jarvis, Andrew) (Entered Minute Entry - Status Conference held on before District Judge Gerald E Rosen. Parties discussed status and progress of case, to submit proposed order of dismissal preserving this court's jurisdiction over Consent Judgment. Another status conference to be scheduled in approximately 3 months. (RBri) (Entered 47 NOTICE TO APPEAR Status Conference set for 10 00 AM before District Judge Gerald E Rosen (RBri) (Entered 48 ORDER DIRECTING DEFENDANT, CITY OF DETROIT, TO PAY THE SPECIAL MASTER'S INVOICE FOR PERIOD OF JULY 3, 2009 THROUGH AUGUST 30, 2009 re 46 Motion. Signed by District Judge Gerald E Rosen. (RBri) (Entered 49 Ex Parte MOTION for Order to Pay SECTION PlaintiffSECTION s' Counsel's Invoices for the Period May 20, 2009 through December 9, 2009 by Detroit, City of. (Attachments # 1 Exhibit 1 - Invoice) (Jarvis, Andrew) (Entered 50 ORDER DIRECTING DEFENDANT, CITY OF DETROIT, TO PAY PLAINTIFFS COUNSEL'S INVOICES FOR THE PERIOD OF MAY 20, 2009 THROUGH DECEMBER 9, 2009 re 49 Motion for Order. Signed by District Judge Gerald E Rosen. (RBri) (Entered Minute Entry - Status Conference held on before District Judge Gerald E Rosen. Disposition Parties to submit appropriate stipulation and order closing case having the Court retain jurisdiction of the case only to enforce consent judgment. Closing documents to be submitted by the end of the month. (RGun) (Entered 51 ORDER TO ADMINISTRATIVELY CLOSE ACTION. Signed by District Judge Gerald E Rosen. (RGun) (Entered 52 Ex Parte MOTION for Order to Pay Special Master, Robert Scott's Invoice for the Period of Jan. 1, 2010 - Mar. 31, 2010 by Detroit, City of. (Attachments # 1 Exhibit Special Master Invoice Ending March 2010) (Jarvis, Andrew) (Entered 53 ORDER DIRECTING DEFENDANT, CITY OF DETROIT, TO PAY SPECIAL MASTER'S INVOICE FOR PERIOD OF JANUARY 1, 2010 THROUGH MARCH 31, 2010 re 52 Motion for Order. Signed by District Judge Gerald E Rosen. (RGun) (Entered 54 Ex Parte MOTION for Order to Pay Special Master's Invoice for October 8, 2009 - December 31, 2009 by Detroit, City of. (Attachments # 1 Exhibit 1 - Special Master's Invoice Dec 2009) (Jarvis, Andrew) (Entered 55 ORDER DIRECTING DEFENDANT, CITY OF DETROIT, TO PAY THE SPECIAL MASTER'S INVOICE FOR PERIOD OF OCTOBER 8, 2009 THROUGH DECEMBER 31, 2009 re 54 Motion for Order. Signed by District Judge Gerald E Rosen. (RGun) (Entered 56 Ex Parte MOTION for Order to Pay SECTION PlaintiffSECTION s' Counsel's Invoices for December 28, 2010 by All SECTION DefendantSECTION s. (Attachments # 1 Index of Exhibits, # 2 Exhibit 1 - Invoices, # 3 Exhibit 2 - Email Correspondence) (Jarvis, Andrew) (Entered 57 ORDER DIRECTING DEFENDANT, CITY OF DETROIT, TO PAY PLAINTIFFS COUNSEL'S INVOICES FOR THE PERIOD DECEMBER 2009 THROUGH MAY 28, 2010 re 56 Motion for Order. Signed by District Judge Gerald E Rosen. (RGun) (Entered 58 ALL PARTIES' STIPULATED ORDER REGARDING PARTS OF PARAGRAPHS 1 THROUGH 3 OF THIS COURT'S AUGUST 31, 2006 ORDER 14. Signed by District Judge Gerald E Rosen. (RGun) (Entered 59 Ex Parte MOTION for Order to Pay Speical Master, Robert Scott's Invoice for July 1, 2010 thru September 28, 2010 by All SECTION DefendantSECTION s. (Attachments # 1 Exhibit 1 - Special Master's Invoice) (Jarvis, Andrew) (Entered 60 Ex Parte MOTION for Order to Pay Plainitff's Counsel's Invoices for May 2010 thru August 2010 by All SECTION DefendantSECTION s. (Attachments # 1 Exhibit 1 - SECTION PlaintiffSECTION's Counsel's Invoice) (Jarvis, Andrew) (Entered 61 ORDER DIRECTING DEFENDANT, CITY OF DETROIT, TO PAY THE SPECIAL MASTER'S INVOICE FOR PERIOD OF JULY 1, 2010 THROUGH SEPTEMBER 28, 2010 re 59 Motion for Order. Signed by District Judge Gerald E Rosen. (RGun) (Entered 62 ORDER DIRECTING DEFENDANT, CITY OF DETROIT, TO PAY PLAINTIFFS COUNSEL'S INVOICES FOR THE PERIOD MAY 2010 THROUGHT AUGUST 2010 re 60 Motion for Order. Signed by District Judge Gerald E Rosen. (RGun) (Entered 63 Ex Parte MOTION for Order to Pay SECTION PlaintiffSECTION s' Counsel's Invoices from Sept 1, 2010 thru Nov 19, 2010 by Detroit, City of. (Attachments # 1 Exhibit PlaintiffSECTION s' Counsel's Invoice) (Jarvis, Andrew) (Entered 64 ORDER DIRECTING DEFENDANT, CITY OF DETROIT, TO PAY PLAINTIFFS' COUNSEL'S INVOICES FOR THE PERIOD SEPTEMBER 1, 2010 THROUGH NOVEMBER 19, 2010. Signed by District Judge Gerald E Rosen. (RGun) (Entered 65 City of Detroit's Fifth Annual Report to the Court REPORT by All SECTION DefendantSECTION s (Jarvis, Andrew) (Entered 66 Ex Parte MOTION for Order to Pay Special Master Invoice for by All SECTION DefendantSECTION s. (Attachments # 1 Exhibit 1 - HR Gray Invoice) (Jarvis, Andrew) (Entered 67 ORDER DIRECTING DEFENDANT, CITY OF DETROIT, TO PAY THE SPECIAL MASTER'S INVOICE FOR PERIOD OF OCTOBER 1, 2010 THROUGH DECEMBER re 66 Motion for Order. Signed by District Judge Gerald E Rosen. (RGun) (Entered 68 Ex Parte MOTION for Order to Pay SECTION PlaintiffSECTION's Counsel's Invoice for by All SECTION DefendantSECTION s. (Attachments # 1 Exhibit 1 - Invoice) (Jarvis, Andrew) (Entered 69 ORDER DIRECTING DEFENDANT, CITY OF DETROIT, TO PAY PLAINTIFFS' COUNSEL'S INVOICES FOR THE PERIOD NOVEMBER 19, 2010 THROUGH MARCH 2, 2011 re 68 Motion for Order. Signed by District Judge Gerald E. Rosen. (RGun) (Entered 70 Ex Parte MOTION for Order to Pay Special Master, Robert Scott's Invoice Through March 31, 2011 by Detroit, City of. (Attachments # 1 Exhibit 1 - Special Master Invoice Through March 31, 2011) (Jarvis, Andrew) (Entered 71 ORDER DIRECTING DEFENDANT, CITY OF DETROIT, TO PAY SPECIAL MASTER'S INVOICE THROUGH MARCH 31, 2011 re 70 Motion for Order. Signed by District Judge Gerald E. Rosen. (RGun) (Entered 72 Resurfacing Report REPORT ADA Ramp Compliance Program by Detroit, City of (Jarvis, Andrew) (Entered 73 ADA Ramp Progress Report - REPORT by Detroit, City of (Jarvis, Andrew) (Entered 74 Ex Parte MOTION for Order to Pay Special Master's Invoice for April 23, 2011 - June 30, 2011 by All SECTION DefendantSECTION s. (Attachments # 1 Exhibit 1 - Invoice April 23, 2011 - June 30, 2011) (Jarvis, Andrew) (Entered 75 ORDER DIRECTING DEFENDANT, CITY OF DETROIT, PAY SPECIAL MASTER'S INVOICE FOR PERIOD OF APRIL 23, 2011 THROUGH JUNE 30, 2011. Motions terminated 74 Ex Parte MOTION for Order to Pay Special Master's Invoice. Signed by District Judge Gerald E. Rosen. (RGun) (Entered 76 Ex Parte MOTION for Order by All SECTION DefendantSECTION s. (Attachments # 1 Exhibit 1 - Invoice March 3, 29, 2011) (Jarvis, Andrew) (Entered 77 ORDER Directing SECTION DefendantSECTION, City of Detroit, To Pay SECTION PlaintiffSECTION s' Counsel's Invoices For The Period March 3, 2011 Through August 10, 2011. 76 Motion for Order terminated. Signed by District Judge Gerald E. Rosen. (JCur) (Entered 78 6th Annual Report - City of Detroit's ADA Ramp Compliance Program REPORT by All SECTION DefendantSECTION s (Jarvis, Andrew) (Entered 79 Ex Parte MOTION for Order to Pay Special Master's Invoice for September 2011 through December 31, 2011 by All SECTION DefendantSECTION s. (Attachments # 1 Exhibit 1 - Special Master Invoice Sept 31, 2011) (Jarvis, Andrew) (Entered 80 ORDER DIRECTING DEFENDANT, CITY OF DETROIT, TO PAY THE SPECIAL MASTER'S INVOICE FOR PERIOD OF SEPTEMBER 2011 THROUGH DECEMBER 31, 2011 re 79 Motion for Order. Signed by District Judge Gerald E. Rosen. (RGun) (Entered 81 ALL PARTIES' STIPULATED ORDER REGARDING PARTIAL SETTLEMENT AS TO RETROFITTING OF 397 INTERSECTIONS. Signed by District Judge Gerald E. Rosen. (Attachments # 1 Document Continuation) (RGun) (Entered 82 Ex Parte MOTION for Order to Pay SECTION PlaintiffSECTION's Counsel's Invoice for August 29, 2011 - February 10, 2012 by Detroit, City of. (Attachments # 1 Exhibit 1 - Invoice for August 29, 2011 - February 10, 2012) (Jarvis, Andrew) (Entered 83 ORDER DIRECTING DEFENDANT, CITY OF DETROIT, TO PAY PLAINTIFFS' COUNSEL'S INVOICES FOR THE PERIOD AUGUST 29, 2011 THROUGH FEBRUARY 20, 2012 re 82 Motion for Order. Signed by District Judge Gerald E. Rosen. (RGun) (Entered 84 Resurfacing List for City of Detroits ADA Ramp Compliance Program REPORT by All SECTION DefendantSECTION s (Jarvis, Andrew) (Entered 85 Ex Parte MOTION for Order to Pay Special Master July 2011 - June 2012 by All SECTION DefendantSECTION s. (Attachments # 1 Exhibit A - Invoices through (Jarvis, Andrew) (Entered 86 ORDER GRANTING 85 Directing SECTION DefendantSECTION, City of Detroit, To Pay Special Masters Invoices for July 2011 Through September 2011 and February 2012 Through June 30, 2012 Signed by District Judge Gerald E. Rosen. (SJa) (Entered 87 Ex Parte MOTION Order to Pay SECTION PlaintiffSECTION's Counsel's Invoice for Feb 2012 - Dec 2012 by All SECTION DefendantSECTION s. (Attachments # 1 Exhibit 1 - Invoice Ending (McFarlane, Jason) (Entered 88 ORDER Directing SECTION DefendantSECTION, City of Detroit to Pay SECTION PlaintiffSECTION s' Counsel's Invoices for the Period February 09, 2012 through December 11, 2012 re 87 Ex-Parte Motion for the Entry of an Order to Pay SECTION PlaintiffSECTION's Counsel's Invoice. Signed by District Judge Gerald E. Rosen. (JOwe) (Entered 89 Ex Parte MOTION for Order to Pay Special Master's Invoices Through December 31, 2012 by All SECTION DefendantSECTION s. (Attachments # 1 Exhibit 1 - Invoices Through December 2012) (McFarlane, Jason) (Entered 90 City of Detroit's 7th Annual Report - ADA Ramp Compliance Program REPORT by All SECTION DefendantSECTION s (McFarlane, Jason) (Entered 91 ORDER granting 89 Motion for Order Directing SECTION DefendantSECTION, City of Detroit, to Pay Special Master's Invoices for September 30, 2012 and December 31, 2012. Signed by District Judge Gerald E. Rosen. (JOwe) (Entered 92 City of Detroit's ADA Ramp Compliance Program Resurfacing List REPORT by All SECTION DefendantSECTION s (McFarlane, Jason) (Entered 93 City of Detroit's 2013 First Quarter Progress Report REPORT by All SECTION DefendantSECTION s (McFarlane, Jason) (Entered 94 Progress REPORT 2013 First Quarter SECOND Progress Report by All SECTION DefendantSECTION s (McFarlane, Jason) (Entered 95 City of Detroit's ADA Ramp Evaluation 2013 Third Progress Report REPORT by All SECTION DefendantSECTION s (McFarlane, Jason) (Entered 96 8TH ANNUAL REPORT CITY OF DETROIT'S ADA RAMP COMPLIANCE by All SECTION DefendantSECTION s (McFarlane, Jason) (Entered 97 City of Detroit's ADA Ramp Compliance Program Resurfacing List REPORT by All SECTION DefendantSECTION s (McFarlane, Jason) (Entered 98 City of Detroit's ADA Ramp Evaluation 2014 First Progress Report REPORT by All SECTION DefendantSECTION s (McFarlane, Jason) (Entered 99 ADA RAMP EVALUATION REPORT-SECOND PROGRESS REPORT (JUNE 1, 31, 2014) REPORT by All SECTION DefendantSECTION s (McFarlane, Jason) (Entered 100 ADA RAMP EVALUATION REPORT- THIRD PROGRESS REPORT (August 1, 2014- September 30, 2014) REPORT by All SECTION DefendantSECTION s (McFarlane, Jason) (Entered 101 ADA RAMP COMPLIANCE PROGRAM 9TH ANNUAL REPORT REPORT by All SECTION DefendantSECTION s (McFarlane, Jason) (Entered 102 ADA RAMP COMPLIANCE PROGRAM RESURFACING LIST REPORT by All SECTION DefendantSECTION s (McFarlane, Jason) (Entered 103 2015 First ADA Ramp Progress REPORT by Detroit, City of (McFarlane, Jason) (Entered 104 ADA Ramp Evaluation REPORT by Detroit, City of (McFarlane, Jason) (Entered 105 2015 ADA Ramp Report 3rd Quarter REPORT by Detroit, City of (McFarlane, Jason) (Entered 106 10th Annual Report ADA Ramp Compliance Program REPORT by Detroit, City of (McFarlane, Jason) (Entered 107 Resurfacing List re ADA Ramp Compliance Program REPORT by Detroit, City of (McFarlane, Jason) (Entered 108 2016 ADA Ramp First Progress REPORT (January 1, 2016 - May 31, 2016) by Detroit, City of (McFarlane, Jason) (Entered 109 2016 ADA Ramp Evaluation REPORT by Detroit, City of (McFarlane, Jason) (Entered 110 City of Detroit ADA Ramp Compliance Program 11th Annual REPORT by Detroit, City of (McFarlane, Jason) (Entered 111 ADA Compliance Program Resurfacing REPORT by Detroit, City of (McFarlane, Jason) (Entered 112 2017 ADA Ramp Evaluation - Second Progress REPORT by Detroit, City of (McFarlane, Jason) (Entered 113 ADA Ramp Evaluation - Third Progress REPORT by Detroit, City of (McFarlane, Jason) (Entered 114 2017 Final ADA Ramp Compliance Program - Twelfth Annual REPORT by Detroit, City of (McFarlane, Jason) (Entered 115 ADA Ramp Compliance Program - Resurfacing List REPORT by Detroit, City of (McFarlane, Jason) (Entered 116 2018 ADA Ramp Evaluation REPORT by Detroit, City of (McFarlane, Jason) (Entered 117 2018 ADA Ramp Evaluation Third Progress REPORT by Detroit, City of (McFarlane, Jason) (Entered 118 City of Detroit's ADA Ramp Compliance Program REPORT by Detroit, City of (McFarlane, Jason) (Entered 119 2019 ADA Ramp Evaluation - First Progress REPORT by Detroit, City of (McFarlane, Jason) (Entered 120 2019 ADA Ramp Evaluation - Second Progress REPORT by Detroit, City of (McFarlane, Jason) (Entered 121 2019 ADA Ramp Evaluation - Third Progress REPORT by Detroit, City of (McFarlane, Jason) (Entered Summary: In 2005, two organizations that advocates for people with disabilities filed this lawsuit n the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Michigan. The plaintiffs sued the City of Detroit, claiming that the city had failed to meet federal and Michigan accessibility standards in altering intersections and sidewalks. In 2006, the parties negotiated a plant to correct the affected intersections and sidewalks. As of 2018, a special master continues to monitor implementation of the agreement.

In 2005, two organizations that advocates for people with disabilities filed this lawsuit n the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Michigan. The plaintiffs sued the City of Detroit, claiming that the city had failed to meet federal and Michigan accessibility standards in altering intersections and sidewalks. In 2006, the parties negotiated a plant to correct the affected intersections and sidewalks. As of 2018, a special master continues to monitor implementation of the agreement.

Using the provided source, generate a concise summary: SECTION ;1,.,I.~ LEI) IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT FOR THE DISTRICT OF NEW MEXICO,~?~~!~_r.ES O'S!.~'CT COUR, • ev (,;o EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY., COMMISSION, SECTION PlaintiffSECTION, bAt;~~_~ CLERK ~ vs., ii il BELL GAS INC., CORTEZ GAS ; COMPANY; AND ABC PROPANE, -- ~--- INC -- --.. No. BB/LAM and No. BB/LAM SECTION DefendantSECTION s. CONSEI'IT DECREE PERTAINII\G TO CLAIMANT CHERI BRISCO Ol'\LY This matter came before the Coun upon the agreement of the parties to cnter into a consent decree for the purposes of settling the claims of Cheri Brisco against the SECTION DefendantSECTION s as asserted by the SECTION PlaintiffSECTION. The Court finds that the panics have agreed as follows I. The United States Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (th. Commissio~ or EEOC ) filed this action against Bell Gas Incorporated and Ballew Distributing of Roswell, New Mexico ( SECTION DefendantSECTION s, Employers, or Ballew ) to enlixcc Title ---'--- -'- -'------. -- - ___·A,;,·~_.. --'-~ VII o the Civil Rights Act of 1964, as amended, 42 et seq. ( Title VII''). In the,f 11 Complaint, the Commission alleged that the SECTION DefendantSECTION s discriminated against Cheri Brisco II becauil,e other sex, female. Specifically, the Commission alleged the SECTION DefendantSECTION s sexually harassed' Ms. Brisco by subjecting her to severe and/or pcr.'asive sexual harassmcnt hy her Managers, which created a hostile work envi~onment. The Commission further alleged that SECTION DefendantSECTION s did not excrcise reasonable care to prevent and promptly con'ect the sexual harassment. rlVent J Decree -1- 1 - - - - - - - - - - -_._------ --, 2. The SECTION DefendantSECTION s denied all allegations of the Plaintifrand aflinnatively statcd that Ms. Brisco was not subjected to a hostile work environment and that the SECTION DefendantSECTION s exercised reasonable ea~e to prevent and promptly correct any sexual harassment. SECTION DefendantSECTION Bell Gas also asserted that it is not Ms. Brisco's employer and is an improper defendant. Ballew Distributing further asserted that it is not subject to Title VII because it lacked the requisite numher of employees.. ___T_ he_p...a....r. _ tie_s d o_n_ ot_obj_ec't t_o__th~ e _j_ u_ risdiction of the Court over this action and waive their rights to a hearing and the Entry or Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law with respect to Cheri Brisco's claim only. 4. The parties have agreed to settle any claims for injury or damages sustained by Ms. Brisco in connection with her employment with the SECTION DefendantSECTION s. This includes all claims j, brought by the EEOC for the benefit of Ms. Brisco in this action as well as claims of any kind that were or could have been asserted by Ms. Brisco, including but not limited to those claims asserted in Brisco's EEOC charge No. 390 A 11210. 5... The amount of the seltlenlent is Twenty Thousand Dollars Within five 1- '-_.. 1 11 II,I! (5) days oCthe entry of the Consent Decree, the SECTION DefendantSECTION s will pay the full scltiemcnt amount - via bltsiness·(= heck -The check will'bemadc payable to Cheri Brisco and will be mailed directly via certilied mail to Ms. Brisco at the address provided by the EEOC. Within five days of issuance of the check, the SECTION DefendantSECTION s will submit a copy of the check and related correspondence to the' Regional. Attorney, Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, Albuquerque District Office, 505 Marquette NW, Suite 900, Albuquerque, New Mexico 87102. 6.. Settlement of Ms. Brisco's claims in this action shall not preclude the Commission from prosecuting the remaining claims in this action against the Derendants. COllselil Decree -~-.. ) -..-.~- 7...Settlement of Ms. Brisco's claims in this action shall not preclude Ms. Brisco from testifying or otherwise participating in the Commission's prosecution of this action with..,' il respect to Evelyn Silva's claims against the SECTION DefendantSECTION s.!t 8. The SECTION DefendantSECTION s will expunge from the pcrsonncllilc of Cheri Brisco all references to the charge of discrimination lile against SECTION DefendantSECTION s. 9. In response to any employment inquiries or reference check conceming Cheri ---',_ _ _ will provide only the dates of Ms. Brisco's employment, position held. e - - _....... - - - - - job duties and salary. 10. Upon entry of this Consent Decree. this case, as it relates to Ms. Brisco's claims, shall be dislili~sed with prejudice. Further, Ms. Brisco releases and discharges SECTION DefendantSECTION s with,'.i respect to ariy claims for damages of any kind related to her alleged with.,1. ·1 SECTION DefendantSECTION s. Each party will bear its o\\'n attomeys fees and costs... It is therefore, ORDERED, ADJUDGED AND DECREED as follows A. The settlement between the parties, including Cheri Brisco, is hereby approved. B. Each party shall bear its own attorneys fees and costs. C. All clain, s by SECTION PlaintiffSECTION EEOC on behalf of Cheri Brisco arc hereby dismissed wilh it ·prejuoice.,' -..----_. ~.';1 iI ENTERED AND.ORDERED this _ _ _ day of I' Consem Deerel! ·3· f., APPROVED.'ANi> CONSENTED TO i, ~ If I • HERRERA, LONG, POUND & KOMER, P.A. A/;~rtley.~ for DJfendan~s EQUAL EMPLOYME \T OPPORTI) \ITY COMM. AI/orneysfor Plain/iff i, MARK E. KOMER h. 2200 Brothers Road t <-.. P O. Box S098. Santa Fe, NM '..~~. -,!I ', --,;. 1 MARY JO O'NEILL Regional AI/orney o C. EMANUEL SMITH Superl'isory TriaIAI/O/ lu \· 3300 N Central Avenue, Suite 690 Phoenix, AZ 85012 VERONICA MOLINA Trial AI/orney Alhuquerquc District Oniec 505 Marquette NW, Suite 900 Albuquerque, NM S71 02 - -~.....-.... -. ---_.. -. -.. Consent Decree --/-,~ -. Summary: In 2012, EEOC filed a complaint on behalf of two female employees of the Defendants, who had suffered sexual harassment. Plaintiff argues the Defendants violate Section 703(a) of Title VII, 42 U.S.C. In 2004, the parties reached a settlement by which Defendants agreed to pay damages to the employees. The case then was closed.

In 2012, EEOC filed a complaint on behalf of two female employees of the Defendants, who had suffered sexual harassment. Plaintiff argues the Defendants violate Section 703(a) of Title VII, 42 U.S.C. In 2004, the parties reached a settlement by which Defendants agreed to pay damages to the employees. The case then was closed.

Using the provided source, generate a concise summary: SECTION SECTION Case SECTION 3 As of 01 19 PM CDT 1 of 7 MAHONEY, PROTO, TERMED United States District Court Northern District of Illinois - CM/ECF LIVE, Ver 4.0.3 (Rockford) CIVIL DOCKET FOR CASE # 3 Chapman, et al v. Daimler-Chrysler, et al Assigned to Honorable Philip G. Reinhard Demand $0 Cause 42 2000e Job Discrimination (Employment) SECTION PlaintiffSECTION Date Filed Date Terminated Jury Demand SECTION PlaintiffSECTION Nature of Suit 442 Civil Rights Jobs Jurisdiction Federal Question Diana Chapman individually and on behalf of similarly situated persons TERMINATED represented by Robert Sharp The Law Offices of Robert Sharp &Assoc. 120 W. Madison Street Suite 505 Chicago, IL 60602 312 920 1745 Email [email protected] TERMINATED LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED Willie J. Nunnery Nunnery Law Office 802 West Broadway Suite 211 Madison, WI (608) TERMINATED LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED SECTION PlaintiffSECTION Carolyn Crawley individually and on behalf of similarly situated persons represented by Carolyn Crawley PO Box 8491 Rockford, IL 61126 PRO SE Robert Sharp (See above for address) TERMINATED LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED SECTION PlaintiffSECTION Tina Garrett individually and on behalf of similarly situated persons represented by Tina Garrett 9631 HighStone Drive Roscoe, IL 61073 PRO SE Robert Sharp (See above for address) TERMINATED LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED SECTION PlaintiffSECTION Paul Golden individually and on behalf of similarly situated persons represented by Robert Sharp (See above for address) TERMINATED SECTION Case SECTION 3 As of 01 19 PM CDT 2 of 7 LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED SECTION PlaintiffSECTION Doris Heibner individually and on behalf of similarly situated persons represented by Robert Sharp (See above for address) TERMINATED LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED SECTION PlaintiffSECTION Minnie Isom individually and on behalf of similarly situated persons represented by Robert Sharp (See above for address) TERMINATED LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED SECTION PlaintiffSECTION Bobbie Renner individually and on behalf of similarly situated persons TERMINATED represented by Rene Hernandez Attorney at Law 1625 East State Street Rockford, IL 61104 (815) Email [email protected] TERMINATED LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED Robert Sharp (See above for address) TERMINATED LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED SECTION PlaintiffSECTION Mary J Spence individually and on behalf of similarly situated persons represented by Robert Sharp (See above for address) TERMINATED LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED V. SECTION DefendantSECTION Daimler-Chrysler Corporation represented by Stephen E. Balogh WilliamsMcCarthy, LLP 120 West State Street Suite 400 Rockford, IL 61101 (815) Email [email protected] LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED Brendan A. Maher United States Attorney's Office (Rockford) 308 West State Street Suite 300 Rockford, IL 61101 (815) Fax (815) SECTION Case SECTION 3 As of 01 19 PM CDT 3 of 7 Email [email protected] ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED John James Holevas WilliamsMcCarthy 120 West State Street PO Box 219 Rockford, IL (815) Email [email protected] ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED Troy E. Haggestad WilliamsMcCarthy 120 West State Street PO Box 219 Rockford, IL (815) Fax (815) Email [email protected] ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED SECTION DefendantSECTION International Union of United Auto Workers Local Union 1268 Date Filed # Docket Text 1 COMPLAINT; jury demand - Civil cover sheet - Appearance(s) of Robert Sharp as attorney(s) for plaintiff Diana Chapman, plaintiff Carolyn Crawley, plaintiff Tina Garrett, plaintiff Paul Golden, plaintiff Doris Heibner, plaintiff Minnie Isom, plaintiff Bobbie Renner, plaintiff Mary J Spence ( 0 summons(es) issued.) ( Documents 1-1 through 1-3) (clb) (Entered RECEIPT regarding payment of filing fee paid; on in the amount of $ receipt # (clb) (Entered THIS matter is referred to the Hon. P. Michael Mahoney pursuant to Internal Operating Procedure 11(d). (clb) (Entered SCHEDULE set on 8/8/00 by Hon. P. Michael Mahoney Status hearing set to 1 30 SECTION PlaintiffSECTION is directed to notify any party filing an appearance subsequent to the entry of this order of the status hearing. Mailed notice (glg) (Entered SCHEDULE set on by Hon. P. Michael Mahoney Status hearing reset to 1 30 9/6/00. Mailed notice (glg) (Entered SCHEDULE set on 9/6/00 by Hon. P. Michael Mahoney Status hearing held and continued to 1 30. No notice (glg) (Entered TWO original summons and two copies issued as to defendant's Daimler-Chrysler, Intl Union of United on (fce) (Entered 2 ATTORNEY APPEARANCE for defendant Daimler-Chrysler by Stephen E. Balogh, Troy E. Haggestad, Brendan A. Maher, John James Holevas. (fce) (Entered 3 MOTION by defendant to dismiss ; Notice; Memorandum of law in support of their motion (Attachments). (fce) (Entered SCHEDULE set on by Hon. P. Michael Mahoney Pursuant to request of counsel, Status hearing and noticed motion reset to 1 30. Telephoned notice (glg) (Entered SECTION Case SECTION 3 As of 01 19 PM CDT 4 of 7 4 MINUTE ORDER of by Hon. P. Michael Mahoney Filed defendant's motion to dismiss 3-1. Answer brief to motion due Reply to answer brief due Ruling on defendant's motion to dismiss will be by mail. Status hearing held. If a party is not going to file a response or reply, it is that party's obligation, within the time frame established by this order, to so notify the court in writing. Parties to hold FRCP 26(f) conference. Case management order due Initial pretrial conference set for at 1 30 pm. Mailed notice (fce) (Entered 5 MOTION by plaintiff's for enlargement of time to file its' response to defendant's motion to dismiss, or in the alternative, to file its' response instanter (Attachment); Notice. (fce) (Entered 6 LETTER dated from defendant's attorney informing the court they do not intend on filing a reply. (fce) (Entered 7 MINUTE ORDER of 2/7/01 by Hon. Philip G. Reinhard SECTION PlaintiffSECTION's motion for enlargement of time to to file response to motion to dismiss is granted 5-1. Reply due By plaintiff to either file voluntary dismissals as to other defendant(s) without presentment or file a motion to withdraw with presentment. Mailed notice (fce) (Entered 8 RESPONSE by plaintiff to defendant's memorandum of law in support of its motion to dismiss 3-1 (Attachments); Notice(fce) Modified on (Entered 9 PETITION by plaintiff's attorney to withdraw as counsel ; Notice. (fce) (Entered 10 AMENDED RESPONSE by plaintiffs to defendants motion to dismiss 3-1 (Attachments); Notice. (fce) (Entered 11 FINAL REPLY memorandum by defendant Daimler-Chrysler in support of its motion to dismiss 3-1. (fce) (Entered 12 MINUTE ORDER of by Hon. P. Michael Mahoney SECTION PlaintiffSECTION's Carolyn Crawley, Paul Golden, Tina Garrett and Bobbie Renner's petition for Robert Sharp, Jr. to withdraw as counsel is granted 9-1. Individual plaintiff's given to 4/4/01 to retain counsel. Retained counsel for individual plaintiff's to appear at the initial pretrial conference set for at 1 30 pm or causes will be dismissed for want of prosecution. A copy of this order is being sent to the individual plaintiff's addresses. Mailed notice (fce) (Entered SCHEDULE set on by Hon. P. Michael Mahoney Initial Pretrial conference held and continued to 1 30. SECTION PlaintiffSECTION Renner given to to retain counsel. Non-represented plaintiffs or counsel must appear or case will be dismissed for want of prosecution. Represented plaintiffs FRCP disclosure due No notice (glg) (Entered 13 MOTION by plaintiff's Diana Chapman, Doris Heibner, Minnie Isom, Mary J Spence to amend complaint ; Notice. (fce) (Entered 14 MINUTE ORDER of by Hon. P. Michael Mahoney SECTION PlaintiffSECTION's motion to amend complaint 13-1 is entered and continued to discovery conference set for at 1 30 pm. SECTION PlaintiffSECTION to submit proposed amended complaint to defendant and court by No notice (fce) (Entered 15 AMENDED COMPLAINT 1-1 by plaintiff's Diana Chapman, Doris Heibner, Minnie Isom, Mary J Spence; Notice. (fce) (Entered 16 MINUTE ORDER of by Hon. P. Michael Mahoney Initial pretrial conference held and continued with motion to amend complaint to at 1 30 pm. SECTION PlaintiffSECTION s Renner and Golden given to to retain counsel. It appearing that Tina Garrett and Carolyn Crawley did not appear as ordered on it is the Report and Recommendation of the Magistrate Judge that this case be dismissed for want of prosecution as to these two plaintiffs. Parties are given ten days from service of this order, as calculated under Rule 6 to appeal to Judge Reinhard pursuant to FRCP 72. Copy mailed to them. Mailed notice (fce) (Entered SECTION Case SECTION 3 As of 01 19 PM CDT 5 of 7 17 MINUTE ORDER of by Hon. P. Michael Mahoney SECTION PlaintiffSECTION's Chapman, Heibner, Ison and Spence's motion for leave to amend complaint is granted 13-1. Response due SECTION DefendantSECTION to submit letter regarding status of motion to dismiss. Initial pretrial conference held and continued to at 1 30 pm. No notice (fce) (Entered 18 ATTORNEY APPEARANCE for plaintiff Bobbie Renner by Rene Hernandez (fce) (Entered 19 OBJECTION by plaintiff Carolyn Crawley-Guerin to minute order dismissing party 16-1 (Attachments). (fce) (Entered 20 MOTION by plaintiff's Diana Chapman, Doris Heibner, Minnie Isom, Mary J Spence for pretrial discovery pursuant to FRCP 26 ; Notice. (fce) (Entered 21 PARTIES' proposed case management order by plaintiff. (fce) (Entered 22 MINUTE ORDER of by Hon. P. Michael Mahoney Initial pretrial conference held. Case management order approved. FRCP disclosure due Fact discovery cutoff on class certification set for Class certification motion due It is the Report and Recommendation of the Magistrate Judge that plaintiff Paul Golden be dismissed for want of prosecution for failure to appear. Parties are given ten days from receipt of this order to appeal to Judge Reinhard as calculated under Rule 6 pursuant to FRCP 72. Discovery conference set for at 1 30 pm. Mailed notice (fce) (Entered 23 MOTION by defendant to dismiss ; Memorandum in support of their motion; Notice. (fce) Modified on (Entered 24 MINUTE ORDER of by Hon. P. Michael Mahoney Filed defendant's motion to dismiss 23-1. Answer brief to motion due Reply to answer brief due Ruling on defendant's motion to dismiss will be by mail. If a party is not going file a brief in response or reply, it is that party's obligation, within the time frame established by this order, to so notify the court in writing. Mailed notice (fce) (Entered 25 MINUTE ORDER of by Hon. Philip G. Reinhard For the reasons stated on the reverse Memorandum Opinion and Order, the Magistrate Judge's Report and Recommendation dated is adopted in part and denied in part. SECTION PlaintiffSECTION Crawley's claims are reinstated, although if she fails to show up for court dates and otherwise participate in the litigation, or hire an attorney in her stead, her claims will be dismissed. The court adopts the Report and Recommendation of the Magistrate Judge as to plaintiff Garrett, and her claims are dismissed with prejudice for want of prosecution. The court adopts the Report and Recommendation of the Magistrate Judge dated and plaintiff Golden's claims are dismissed with prejudice for want of prosecution. Entered Memorandum Opinion and Order. (For further detail see order.) Mailed notice (fce) (Entered 26 MINUTE ORDER of by Hon. Philip G. Reinhard For the reasons stated on the reverse Memorandum Opinion and Order, both of defendant Daimler-Chrysler's motions to dismiss are denied 23-1. Entered Memorandum Opinion and Order. (For further detail see order.) Mailed notice (fce) (Entered 27 ANSWER by defendant to class action complaint 1-1. (fce) (Entered 28 ANSWER by defendant Daimler-Chrysler to amended complaint 15-1. (fce) (Entered 29 MOTION by plaintiff Diana Chapman for substitution of counsel ; Notice. (fce) (Entered SECTION Case SECTION 3 As of 01 19 PM CDT 6 of 7 30 NOTICE by plaintiff Tina Garrett of change of address. (fce) (Entered 31 NOTICE by plaintiff Carolyn Crawley of change of address (fce) (Entered 32 MINUTE ORDER of by Hon. P. Michael Mahoney Discovery conference held. Diana Chapman's motion for substitution of counsel is granted 29-1. Robert Sharp given leave to withdraw and Willie Nunnery given leave to file his appearance. Fact discovery cutoff extended to Discovery conference continued to 1 30 pm on Motion for class certification due No notice (fce) (Entered 33 MINUTE ORDER of by Hon. P. Michael Mahoney Parties agree that Magistrate Mahoney can enter order. By agreement Diane Chapman is dismissed as a plaintiff without prejudice under FRCP 41. terminating party Diana Chapman Mailed notice (fce) (Entered 34 MOTION by plaintiffs' Doris Heibner, Minnie Isom, Mary J Spence to extend discovery ; Notice. (fce) (Entered 35 MINUTE ORDER of by Hon. P. Michael Mahoney Discovery conference held. SECTION PlaintiffSECTION's motion to extend discovery to is granted 34-1. Dispositive motions due Discovery conference to 1 30 pm on Mailed notice (fce) (Entered 36 MOTION by plaintiff Bobbie Renner to extend fact discovery ; Notice. (fce) (Entered 37 MINUTE ORDER of 2/4/02 by Hon. P. Michael Mahoney Discovery conference held and continued to at 1 30 p.m. SECTION DefendantSECTION's motion for protective order allowed filed but the court will hold motion until 2/8/02 during which time any objections shall be filed in writing. Motion to extend fact discovery allowed 36-1. Dispositive motions due Fact discovery cutoff date SECTION PlaintiffSECTION Crawley to appear on at 1 30 p.m. or cause will be dismissed for want of prosecution. Mailed notice (fce) (Entered 38 MINUTE ORDER of by Hon. P. Michael Mahoney Pursuant to this court's order and no objection to the protective order having been offererd, this court enters the protective order in this case filed Entered order. Mailed notice (fce) (Entered 38 ENTERED PROTECTIVE ORDER (fce) (Entered SCHEDULE set on by Hon. P. Michael Mahoney Due to the court's schedule, discovery conference reset for 1 30. Mailed notice (glg) (Entered 39 MINUTE ORDER of by Hon. P. Michael Mahoney Discovery conference held and continued to at 1 30 pm. Fact discovery closed Amendment of pleadings due Dispositive motions due Carolyn Crawley does not appear as ordered previously. It is the Report and Recommendation of the Magistrate Judge that Carolyn Crawley be dismissed as a plaitniff for want of prosecution. Parties are given ten days from service of this order, as calculated under Rule 6 to appeal to Judge Reinhard, pursuant to FRCP 72. Mailed notice (fce) (Entered 40 MINUTE ORDER of by Hon. Philip G. Reinhard On April 26, 2002 Magistrate Judge Mahoney issued a Report and Receommendation that the claim of plaintiff Carolyn Crawley be dismissed for want of prosecution for her failure to appear after a prior warning. Crawley has not filed a timely objection to the Report and Recommendation and it is adopted. The claim of Crawley only is dismissed for want of prosecution pursuant to Fed.R.Civ.P. 41(b). Mailed notice (fce) (Entered SCHEDULE set on by Hon. P. Michael Mahoney Discovery conference held and continued to 1 30. Fact Discovery ordered closed on. Mailed notice (glg) (Entered SECTION Case SECTION 3 As of 01 19 PM CDT 7 of 7 41 MINUTE ORDER of by Hon. P. Michael Mahoney At the request of the parties, the discovery conference set for is reset for at 1 30 pm. Telephoned notice (fce) (Entered SCHEDULE set on by Hon. P. Michael Mahoney Discovery conference held and continued to 4 00. Mailed notice (glg) (Entered 42 MINUTE ORDER of by Hon. P. Michael Mahoney Discovery conference held. Attorney Robert Sharp does not appear. As to plaintiff Bobbie Jo Renner, Parties report cause settled. Parties given to to file stipulation to dismiss. Court retains jurisdiction to enforece settlement. Dispositive motions due Discovery conference continued to at 1 30 pm. Mailed notice (fce) (Entered 43 MINUTE ORDER of by Hon. Philip G. Reinhard Pursuant to Magistrate Mahoney's order of plaintiff, Bobbie Jo Renner is dismissed as a party plaintiff to this case. Stipulation to dismiss as to this plaintiff to be filed by Court retains jurisdiction to enforce settlement. terminating party Bobbie Renner Mailed notice (fce) (Entered 44 MOTION by plaintiff Mary J Spence to withdraw as counsel ; NOtice. (fce) (Entered 45 MOTION by plaintiff Minnie Isom to withdraw as counsel ; Notice. (fce) (Entered 46 MOTION by plaintiff Doris Heibner to withdraw as counsel ; Notice. (fce) (Entered 47 MINUTE ORDER of by Hon. P. Michael Mahoney SECTION PlaintiffSECTION's Heibner, Isom and Spence's motions for Robert Share to withdraw as counsel are granted 46-1, 45-1, 44-1. SECTION PlaintiffSECTION s given to to retain counsel. Status hearing to set dispositive motions set for 1 30 p.m. on SECTION PlaintiffSECTION s or retained counsel must appear or case may dismissed for want of prosecution. Mailed notice (fce) (Entered 48 MOTION by plaintiff Doris Heibner to compel settlement ; Notice. (fce) (Entered 49 MOTION by plaintiff Minnie Isom to compel settlement ; Notice. (fce) (Entered 50 MINUTE ORDER of by Hon. P. Michael Mahoney Status hearing held and continued to 3 00 p.m. on. It appearing the Mary J. Spence does not appear as ordered by the court. It is the Report and Recommendation of the Magistrate Judge that her cause of action be dismissed for want of prosecution. Parties are given ten days from service of this order, as calculated under Rule 6 to appeal to Judge Reinhard, pursuant to FRCP 72. Status and motions as to plaintiffs Heibner and Isom continued to at 3 00 p.m. Mailed notice (fce) (Entered 51 MINUTE ORDER of by Hon. P. Michael Mahoney Settlement conference held. Parties report cause settled. Parties given to to file stipulation to dismiss. Court retains jurisdiction to enforce settlement. Mailed notice (fce) (Entered 52 MINUTE ORDER of by Hon. Philip G. Reinhard Pursuant to Magistrate Mahoney's order of this case is dismissed. Parties given to to file stipulation to dismiss. Court retains jurisdiction to enforce settlement. Any pending motions are now moot. terminating case Mailed notice (fce) (Entered Summary: On July 12th, 2000 eight female employees filed suit in the United States District Court in the Northern District of Illinois against DaimlerChrysler Corp. They alleged DaimlerChrysler engaged in age discrimination, gender discrimination, race discrimination, and violations of the American with Disabilities Act (ADA). As discovery progressed various plaintiffs were added and some were dismissed from the case. Settlement negations concerning the remaining plaintiffs resulted in individual settlement agreements. The exact terms of these settlements are not available. The case was completely dismissed on October 29th, 2002.

On July 12th, 2000 eight female employees filed suit in the United States District Court in the Northern District of Illinois against DaimlerChrysler Corp. They alleged DaimlerChrysler engaged in age discrimination, gender discrimination, race discrimination, and violations of the American with Disabilities Act (ADA). As discovery progressed various plaintiffs were added and some were dismissed from the case. Settlement negations concerning the remaining plaintiffs resulted in individual settlement agreements. The exact terms of these settlements are not available. The case was completely dismissed on October 29th, 2002.

Using the provided source, generate a concise summary: SECTION SECTION Case SECTION 1 As of 06 06 PM EST 1 of 16 CLOSED,STAYED U.S. District Court District of Maryland (Baltimore) CIVIL DOCKET FOR CASE # 1 Evans v. Saar et al Assigned to Judge Benson Everett Legg Cause 42 1983 Civil Rights Act - Civil Action for Deprivation of Rights SECTION PlaintiffSECTION Date Filed Date Terminated Jury Demand None Nature of Suit 440 Civil Rights Other Jurisdiction Federal Question Vernon Evans, Jr. represented by Anne H Geraghty Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr LLP 1875 Pennsylvania Ave NW Washington, DC 20006 Fax Email [email protected] TERMINATED LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED Anne Harden Tindall Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr LLP 1875 Pennsylvania Ave NW Washington, DC 20006 Fax Email [email protected] TERMINATED LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED Jeffrey Brian O Toole Bonner Kiernan Trebach & Crociata 1233 20th Street, NW 8th Floor Washington, DC 20036 Fax Email [email protected] LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED Stephanie Katherine Wood Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr LLP 1875 Pennsylvania Ave. NW Washington, DC 20006 Fax Email [email protected] LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED A Stephen Hut, Jr Office of the Public Defender Six Saint Paul St Baltimore, MD 21202 SECTION Case SECTION 1 As of 06 06 PM EST 2 of 16 Fax ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED Julie Sippel Dietrich 10600 Shady Cir Silver Spring, MD 20903 TERMINATED ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED Kalea Seitz Clark Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr LLP 1875 Pennsylvania Ave NW Washington, DC 20006 Fax Email [email protected] TERMINATED ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED Todd C Zubler Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr LLP 2445 M St NW Washington, DC 20037 Fax Email [email protected] ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED V. SECTION DefendantSECTION Mary Ann Saar Secretary, Department of Public Safety and Correctional Services represented by Laura Mullally Maryland Office of the Attorney General 300 East Joppa Road Suite 1000 Towson, MD 21286 Email [email protected] LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED Scott S Oakley Inmate Grievance Office 115 Sudbrook Lane Ste 200 Pikesville, MD 21208 Fax Email [email protected] TERMINATED LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED J Joseph Curran, Jr Office of the Attorney General of Maryland 200 Saint Paul Pl Baltimore, MD 21202 Fax TERMINATED Phillip Michael Pickus SECTION Case SECTION 1 As of 06 06 PM EST 3 of 16 Maryland Department of State Police Bldg A 1201 Reisterstown Rd Pikesville, MD 21208 Fax Email [email protected] ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED SECTION DefendantSECTION Frank C. Sizer, Jr. Commissioner, Maryland Division of Correction represented by Laura Mullally (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED Scott S Oakley (See above for address) TERMINATED LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED J Joseph Curran, Jr (See above for address) TERMINATED Phillip Michael Pickus (See above for address) ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED SECTION DefendantSECTION Lehrman Dotson Warden, Maryland Correctional Adjustment Center represented by Laura Mullally (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED Scott S Oakley (See above for address) TERMINATED LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED J Joseph Curran, Jr (See above for address) TERMINATED Phillip Michael Pickus (See above for address) ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED SECTION DefendantSECTION Gary Hornbaker Warden, Metropolitan Transition Center represented by Laura Mullally (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED Scott S Oakley (See above for address) TERMINATED LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED J Joseph Curran, Jr (See above for address) SECTION Case SECTION 1 As of 06 06 PM EST 4 of 16 TERMINATED Phillip Michael Pickus (See above for address) ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED SECTION DefendantSECTION John Does represented by Laura Mullally (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED SECTION DefendantSECTION Secretary, DPSCS Gary D. Maynard repre Summary: On January 19, 2006, a death-sentenced inmate of the Maryland Correctional Adjustment Center in Baltimore, Maryland filed a lawsuit under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 against the Maryland Department of Corrections in the U.S. District Court for the District of Maryland. The plaintiff objected to the three-drug cocktail (sodium pentothal, pancuronium bromide, and potassium chloride) used in Maryland's lethal injections. The plaintiff argued that the defendant's lethal injection procedures arbitrarily and unnecessarily created a grave risk that he would suffer extreme pain during his execution, thus violating his rights under the Eighth and Fourteenth Amendments. The plaintiff also filed a similar complaint in the Circuit Court for Baltimore City alleging that the defendants failed to follow Maryland law because the execution protocol had not been adopted under the Maryland Administrative Procedures Act (MAPA). On December 19, 2006 the Maryland Court of Appeals invalidated the Maryland execution protocols until such time as they were properly adopted under MAPA or exempted from that requirement by an act of the Maryland General Assembly. On January 29, 2007, two bills were introduced in the Maryland General Assembly, one that would exempt the death penalty protocols from the MAPA requirement and one that would repeal the death penalty in the state. The judge agreed to stay the proceedings of this case pending the outcome of the legislation. According to the status report on March 14, 2011, all executions in Maryland had been stayed until the proper administrative regulations were adopted. On August 16, 2012 this case was administratively closed. In May 2013 the Maryland legislature repealed the death penalty for all future convictions and in December 2014 Governor O'Malley commuted the death sentences of the four remaining death-row inmates to life without the possibility of parole.

On January 19, 2006, a death-sentenced inmate of the Maryland Correctional Adjustment Center in Baltimore, Maryland filed a lawsuit under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 against the Maryland Department of Corrections in the U.S. District Court for the District of Maryland. The plaintiff objected to the three-drug cocktail (sodium pentothal, pancuronium bromide, and potassium chloride) used in Maryland's lethal injections. The plaintiff argued that the defendant's lethal injection procedures arbitrarily and unnecessarily created a grave risk that he would suffer extreme pain during his execution, thus violating his rights under the Eighth and Fourteenth Amendments. The plaintiff also filed a similar complaint in the Circuit Court for Baltimore City alleging that the defendants failed to follow Maryland law because the execution protocol had not been adopted under the Maryland Administrative Procedures Act (MAPA). On December 19, 2006 the Maryland Court of Appeals invalidated the Maryland execution protocols until such time as they were properly adopted under MAPA or exempted from that requirement by an act of the Maryland General Assembly. On January 29, 2007, two bills were introduced in the Maryland General Assembly, one that would exempt the death penalty protocols from the MAPA requirement and one that would repeal the death penalty in the state. The judge agreed to stay the proceedings of this case pending the outcome of the legislation. According to the status report on March 14, 2011, all executions in Maryland had been stayed until the proper administrative regulations were adopted. On August 16, 2012 this case was administratively closed. In May 2013 the Maryland legislature repealed the death penalty for all future convictions and in December 2014 Governor O'Malley commuted the death sentences of the four remaining death-row inmates to life without the possibility of parole.

Using the provided source, generate a concise summary: SECTION SECTION Case SECTION 2 As of 11 03 AM EDT 1 of 16 U.S. District Court Eastern District of Michigan (Detroit) CIVIL DOCKET FOR CASE # 2 CLOSED Lowery v. Beztak Properties, Incorporated Assigned to District Judge Nancy G. Edmunds Referred to Magistrate Judge Mona K. Majzoub Magistrate Judge Virginia M. Morgan (Settlement) Cause No cause code entered SECTION PlaintiffSECTION Date Filed Date Terminated Jury Demand Both Nature of Suit 443 Civil Rights Accomodations Jurisdiction Federal Question Michael Lowery represented by Denise M. Heberle Heberle &Finnegan 2580 Craig Road Ann Arbor, MI 48103 Email [email protected] LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED John Mark Finnegan Heberle &Finnegan 2580 Craig Road Ann Arbor, MI 48103 Fax Email [email protected] ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED SECTION PlaintiffSECTION Marilyn Lowrey represented by Denise M. Heberle (See above for address) ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED John Mark Finnegan (See above for address) ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED V. SECTION DefendantSECTION Beztak Properties, Incorporated SECTION DefendantSECTION Beztak Companies, Incorporated SECTION DefendantSECTION represented by Leigh Greden - INACTIVE Miller, Canfield, 101 N. Main Street 7th Floor Ann Arbor, MI LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED represented by Leigh Greden - INACTIVE (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED represented by SECTION Case SECTION 2 Biltmore Properties Companies, Incorporated TERMINATED SECTION DefendantSECTION Uptown Investors L. L. C. SECTION DefendantSECTION Uptown Investors L. L. C. II SECTION DefendantSECTION Monogram Homes SECTION DefendantSECTION Warner, Cantrell and Padmos, Incorporated SECTION DefendantSECTION Looney Ricks Kiss As of 11 03 AM EDT 2 of 16 Gerard V. Mantese Mantese Assoc. 1361 E. Big Beaver Road Troy, MI 48083 Fax Email [email protected] TERMINATED ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED Leigh Greden - INACTIVE (See above for address) ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED Mark C. Rossman Mantese Assoc. 1361 E. Big Beaver Road Troy, MI 48083 Email [email protected] TERMINATED ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED represented by Leigh Greden - INACTIVE (See above for address) ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED represented by Leigh Greden - INACTIVE (See above for address) ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED represented by Brett A. Rendeiro Varnum, Riddering, 39500 High Pointe Boulevard Suite 350 Novi, MI 48375 Email [email protected] ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED Leigh Greden - INACTIVE (See above for address) ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED represented by Kevin J. Gleeson Sullivan, Ward, 25800 Northwestern Highway Suite 1000 Southfield, MI Email [email protected] LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED Craig S. Thompson SECTION Case SECTION 2 SECTION DefendantSECTION Canton, Township of TERMINATED As of 11 03 AM EDT 3 of 16 Sullivan, Ward, 25800 Northwestern Highway Suite 1000 Southfield, MI Email [email protected] ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED John M. Simmerer Sullivan, Ward, 25800 Northwestern Highway Suite 1000 Southfield, MI Email [email protected] ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED Leigh Greden - INACTIVE (See above for address) ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED Theresa L. Kitay 578 Washington Boulevard Suite 836 Marina Del Rey, CA 90292 Fax Email [email protected] ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED represented by Carol A. Rosati Johnson, Rosati, 34405 W. Twelve Mile Road Suite 200 Farmington Hills, MI Email [email protected] TERMINATED ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED Daniel A. Klemptner Johnson, Rosati, LaBarge, Aseltyne &Field, P.C. 34405 W. Twelve Mile Road Suite 200 Farmington Hills, MI 48331 Fax Email [email protected] TERMINATED ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED Gregory R. Grant Cummings McClorey 125 Park Street Suite 415 Traverse City, MI 49684 Fax Email [email protected] TERMINATED ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED SECTION Case SECTION 2 SECTION DefendantSECTION James A. Jackson Director, WCDPS SECTION DefendantSECTION Lorenzo Blount SECTION DefendantSECTION Wayne County Department of Public Services As of 11 03 AM EDT 4 of 16 Kevin L. Bennett Hemming, Polaczyk, 217 W. An Summary: This was a case brought to make a 300 unit apartment complex in Canton Township, MI accessible to persons with mobility impairments. It was filed in 2006 in the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Michigan by two individuals and the Fair Housing Center of Southeastern Michigan. The suit eventually resulted in about three quarters of a million dollars in retrofits, damages to the plaintiffs and attorney fees and costs.

This was a case brought to make a 300 unit apartment complex in Canton Township, MI accessible to persons with mobility impairments. It was filed in 2006 in the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Michigan by two individuals and the Fair Housing Center of Southeastern Michigan. The suit eventually resulted in about three quarters of a million dollars in retrofits, damages to the plaintiffs and attorney fees and costs.

Using the provided source, generate a concise summary: SECTION CM/ECF - U.S. District Court Western District of Louisiana - Docket R... https U.S. District Court Western District of Louisiana (Shreveport) CIVIL DOCKET FOR CASE # 5 CLOSED Equal Employment Opportunity Commission v. Tasa Inc Assigned to Judge Donald E Walter Referred to Magistrate Judge Karen L Hayes Cause 42 2000 Job Discrimination (Race) Date Filed Jury Demand SECTION PlaintiffSECTION Nature of Suit 442 Civil Rights Jobs Jurisdiction U.S. Government SECTION PlaintiffSECTION SECTION PlaintiffSECTION Equal Employment Opportunity Commission represented by Nancy Eleanor Graham E E O C (NO) 1555 Poydras St Ste 1900 New Orleans, LA 70112 Fax Email [email protected] LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED Keith T Hill E E O C (HOU) 1919 Smith St Ste 700 Houston, TX US Fax Michelle T Butler E E O C (NO) 1555 Poydras St Ste 1900 New Orleans, LA 70112 V. SECTION DefendantSECTION Tasa Inc doing business as Orr Minden Country Chevrolet represented by Andrew P Texada Stafford Stewart & Potter P O Box 1711 Alexandria, LA 71309 Fax Email [email protected] LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED 1 of 2 9 05 AM CM/ECF - U.S. District Court Western District of Louisiana - Docket R... https Date Filed # Docket Text 1 COMPLAINT against Tasa Inc with Jury Demand filed by Equal Employment Opportunity Commission. (Attachments # 1 Civil cover sheet)(crt,Dunford, T) (Entered 2 JOINT MOTION to approve and enter consent decree and to dismiss plaintiff's complaint by Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, Tasa Inc. (Attachments # 1 Text of proposed order)(crt,Dunford, T) (Entered NOTICE OF SERVICE SUSPENDED Notice to counsel for plaintiff, N Eleanor Graham is discontinued in this case due to unsuccessful mail delivery resulting from Hurricane Katrina. Until mail delivery resumes and/or notification of a change of address or substitution of counsel is received, above-named counsel will not receive notice. (crt,Reeves, T) (Entered NOTICE OF SERVICE RESTORED Notice to N Eleanor Graham has been RESUMED. Aforementioned counsel is advised that they will not recieve notice of any activity that occurred in this case from the time notice was suspended until this entry. Counsel should obtain a report of filings by running a Docket Activity for My Cases Report via PACER. (crt,Alvarez, S) (Entered 3 CONSENT DECREE Within 30 days after the entry of this Decree, Tasa shall pay the sum of as damages to Mr Thompson in return for a dismissal of this suit. Signed by Judge Donald E Walter on (crt,McDonnell, D) (Entered PACER Service Center Transaction Receipt 09 05 35 PACER Login hs0328 Client Code eeoc Description Docket Report Search Criteria 5 Billable Pages 2 Cost 0.16 2 of 2 9 05 AM Summary: On August 22, 2005, the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) filed this Title VII retaliation claim against Tasa, Inc., (doing business as Orr Minden Country Chevrolet) on behalf of a black employee who had a pending race discrimination charge and no discipline or warnings at the time of his firing. The complaint was filed with a joint motion for a consent decree, which the Court (Donald E. Walter) approved on November 11, 2005. The terms of the decree provided for damages to the employee) and injunctive relief. The parties bore their own costs. Under the decree, Tasa, Inc., had to provide annual Title VII training to all employees in Louisiana, to post an EEOC poster in a conspicuous location, to report to the EEOC annually the date, attendees, and subject matters of the Title VII trainings, and to institute and follow a promotion policy. The promotion policy required that all vacant positions be posted before an employee is promoted to the positions, that all qualified candidates be interviewed, and that all applications, resumes, and interview notes be maintained. The decree expired automatically after three years. The case is now closed.

On August 22, 2005, the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) filed this Title VII retaliation claim against Tasa, Inc., (doing business as Orr Minden Country Chevrolet) on behalf of a black employee who had a pending race discrimination charge and no discipline or warnings at the time of his firing. The complaint was filed with a joint motion for a consent decree, which the Court (Donald E. Walter) approved on November 11, 2005. The terms of the decree provided for damages to the employee) and injunctive relief. The parties bore their own costs. Under the decree, Tasa, Inc., had to provide annual Title VII training to all employees in Louisiana, to post an EEOC poster in a conspicuous location, to report to the EEOC annually the date, attendees, and subject matters of the Title VII trainings, and to institute and follow a promotion policy. The promotion policy required that all vacant positions be posted before an employee is promoted to the positions, that all qualified candidates be interviewed, and that all applications, resumes, and interview notes be maintained. The decree expired automatically after three years. The case is now closed.

Using the provided source, generate a concise summary: SECTION SECTION Case SECTION Document Page 1 Date Filed PRECEDENTIAL UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE THIRD CIRCUIT ________________ No. ________________ BRITTAN HOLLAND, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated; LEXINGTON NATIONAL INSURANCE CORPORATION, Appellants v. KELLY ROSEN, Pretrial Services Team Leader; MARY COLALILLO, Camden County Prosecutor; CHRISTOPHER S. PORRINO, Attorney General of New Jersey ________________ Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of New Jersey (D.C. Civil Action No. District Judge Honorable Jerome B. Simandle ________________ Argued February 21, 2018 Before AMBRO, RESTREPO, and FUENTES, Circuit Judges SECTION Case SECTION Document Page 2 Date Filed (Opinion filed July 9, 2018) Paul D. Clement, Esquire Robert M. Bernstein, Esquire Edmund G. LaCour, Jr., Esquire Andrew C. Lawrence, Esquire Michael F. Williams, Esquire Kirkland & Ellis 655 15th Street, N.W. Washington, DC 20005 (Argued) Justin T. Quinn, Esquire Robinson Miller One Newark Center, 19th Floor Newark, NJ 07102 Counsel for Appellants Christopher S. Porrino Attorney General of New Jersey Stuart M. Feinblatt, Esquire (Argued) Christopher J. Riggs, Esquire Office of Attorney General of New Jersey 25 Market Street Richard J. Hughes Justice Complex Trenton, NJ 08625 Counsel for Appellees Alexander R. Shalom, Esquire Tess Borden, Esquire Edward Barocas, Esquire Jeanne LoCicero, Esquire (Argued) 2 SECTION Case SECTION Document Page 3 Date Filed American Civil Liberties Union of New Jersey Foundation 89 Market Street P.O. Box 32159 Newark, NJ 07102 Alan E. Schoenfeld, Esquire Ryan M. Chabot, Esquire WilmerHale 7 World Trade Center 250 Greenwich Street New York, NY 10007 Seth P. Waxman, Esquire David M. Lehn, Esquire Tiffany R. Wright, Esquire WilmerHale 1875 Pennsylvania Avenue, N.W. Washington, DC 20006 Counsel for Amici Appellees ________________ OPINION OF THE COURT ________________ AMBRO, Circuit Judge New Jersey’s system of pretrial release has long relied on monetary bail to ensure the presence of an accused person at trial. State v. Robinson, 160 A.3d 1, 5 (N.J. 2017). But in 2017, following an amendment to its Constitution, the New Jersey Criminal Justice Reform Act took effect. It replaced New Jersey’s former monetary bail system with a new 3 SECTION Case SECTION Document Page 4 Date Filed framework that prioritizes the use of non-monetary conditions of release over monetary bail to secure a criminal defendant’s pretrial liberty. Brittan Holland and Lexington National Insurance Corporation challenge this feature of the Reform Act as a violation of the Eighth Amendment, the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment, and the Fourth Amendment of the United States Constitution. They seek a preliminary injunction enjoining Kelly Rosen, the Team Leader for Pretrial Services in the Criminal Division of the Superior Court of New Jersey, Mary E. Colalillo, the Camden County Prosecutor, and Christopher S. Porrino, the Attorney General of New Jersey, and their agents (for convenience we refer to the named officials and their agents collectively as the “State”), “from taking any actions to enforce statutory provisions of the Reform Act... that allow imposition of severe restrictions on the pre-trial liberty of presumptively innocent criminal defendants without offering the option of monetary bail.” Proposed Order of SECTION PlaintiffSECTION s Granting Motion for a Temporary Restraining Order and a Preliminary Injunction at 2, Holland v. Rosen, 277 F. Supp. 3d 707 (2017) (No. After considering the standing of Holland and Lexington to bring suit, we conclude, as did the District Court (per Judge Simandle), that only the former may make the challenge here. On the merits, the question key to Holland’s contentions is whether there is a federal constitutional right to deposit money or obtain a corporate surety bond to ensure a criminal defendant’s future appearance in court as an equal alternative Summary: In June 2017, a man awaiting criminal trial and Lexington National Insurance Corporation filed this lawsuit in the U.S. District Court for the District of New Jersey. The plaintiffs alleged that that the Criminal Justice Reform Act violated the bail provision of the Eighth Amendment, due process under the Fourteenth Amendment, and freedom from unreasonable search and seizure under the Fourth Amendment because the act favored non-monetary pre-trial release conditions over bail. After and appeal to the Third Circuit regarding denial of preliminary injunction and a subsequent denial of certiorari in the Supreme Court, the plaintiff voluntarily dismissed the case. This case is now closed.

In June 2017, a man awaiting criminal trial and Lexington National Insurance Corporation filed this lawsuit in the U.S. District Court for the District of New Jersey. The plaintiffs alleged that that the Criminal Justice Reform Act violated the bail provision of the Eighth Amendment, due process under the Fourteenth Amendment, and freedom from unreasonable search and seizure under the Fourth Amendment because the act favored non-monetary pre-trial release conditions over bail. After and appeal to the Third Circuit regarding denial of preliminary injunction and a subsequent denial of certiorari in the Supreme Court, the plaintiff voluntarily dismissed the case. This case is now closed.

Using the provided source, generate a concise summary: SECTION USDC ND/OK SECTION Case SECTION 4 As of 04 24 PM CST Page 1 of 8 U.S. District Court U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Oklahoma (Tulsa) CIVIL DOCKET FOR CASE # 4 Randolph, et al v. Owasso Sch Dist I011, et al Assigned to Judge Terence Kern Demand $0 Cause 42 1983 Civil Rights Act SECTION PlaintiffSECTION Ron Randolph as parent and next friend of his minor daughter, Amanda M. (MiMi) Randolph, and on behalf of all others similarly situated - Amanda M Randolph - Mimi Randolph SECTION PlaintiffSECTION Coy E Brown as parent and next friend of his minor daughter, Hayley E. Brown, and on behalf of all others similarly situated - Hayley E Brown Date Filed Date Terminated Jury Demand None Nature of Suit 440 Civil Rights Other Jurisdiction Federal Question represented by Deborah Brake National Women's Law Center 11 DePont Cir Ste 800 Washington, DC 20036 LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED Judith C Appelbaum National Women's Law Center 11 DePont Cir Ste 800 Washington, DC 20036 LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED Raymond L Yasser Smolen Smolen &Roytman PLLC 701 S CINCINNATI AVE TULSA, OK 74119 Fax Email [email protected] LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED Samuel J Schiller Schiller Law Firm 4113 Cumby Rd Ste 200 Cookeville, TN 38501 Fax Email [email protected] LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED represented by Deborah Brake (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED Judith C Appelbaum (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED Raymond L Yasser USDC ND/OK SECTION Case SECTION 4 As of 04 24 PM CST Page 2 of 8 (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED Samuel J Schiller (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED SECTION PlaintiffSECTION Candace L Brown as parent and next friend of her minor daughter, Hayley E. Brown, and on behalf of all others similarly situated - Hayley E Brown represented by Deborah Brake (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED Judith C Appelbaum (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED Raymond L Yasser (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED Samuel J Schiller (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED SECTION PlaintiffSECTION Robert C Parker as parent and next friend of his minor daughters, Sarah J. Parker and Rebekah S. Parker, and on behalf of all others similarly situated - Sarah J Parker - Rebekah S Parker represented by Deborah Brake (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED Judith C Appelbaum (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED Raymond L Yasser (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED Samuel J Schiller (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED SECTION PlaintiffSECTION Susan J Parker as parent and next friend of her minor daughters, Sarah J. Parker and Rebekah S. Parker, and on behalf of all others similarly situated - Sarah J Parker - Rebekah S Parker represented by Deborah Brake (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED Judith C Appelbaum (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED Raymond L Yasser USDC ND/OK SECTION Case SECTION 4 As of 04 24 PM CST Page 3 of 8 (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED Samuel J Schiller (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED SECTION PlaintiffSECTION Robert F Randolph, Jr as parent and next friends of his minor daughter, Teri Jo Randolph, and on behalf of all others similarly situated - Teri Jo Randolph represented by Deborah Brake (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED Judith C Appelbaum (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED Raymond L Yasser (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED Samuel J Schiller (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED SECTION PlaintiffSECTION Vicki L Randolph as parent and next friend of her minor daughter, Teri Jo Randolph, and on behalf of all others similarly situated - Teri Jo Randolph represented by Deborah Brake (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED Judith C Appelbaum (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED Raymond L Yasser (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED Samuel J Schiller (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED SECTION PlaintiffSECTION Jim Pigg as parent and next friend of his minor daughter, Melisa Pigg, and on behalf of all others similarly situated - Melisa Pigg represented by Deborah Brake (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED Judith C Appelbaum (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED Raymond L Yasser USDC ND/OK SECTION Case SECTION 4 As of 04 24 PM CST Page 4 of 8 (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED Samuel J Schiller (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED SECTION PlaintiffSECTION Kay Pigg as parent and next friend of her minor daughter, Melisa Pigg, and on behalf of all others similarly situated - Melisa Pigg represented by Deborah Brake (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED Judith C Appelbaum (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED Raymond L Yasser (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED Samuel J Schiller (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED SECTION PlaintiffSECTION Tom Martin as parent and next friend of his minor daughter, Shera Mae Martin, and on behalf of all others similarly situated. - Shera Mae Martin represented by Deborah Brake (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED Judith C Appelbaum (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED Raymond L Yasser (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED Samuel J Schiller (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED SECTION PlaintiffSECTION Becky Martin as parent and next friend of her minor daughter, Shera Mae Martin, and on behalf of all others similarly situated, - Shera Mae Martin represented by Deborah Brake (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED Judith C Appelbaum (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED Raymond L Yasser USDC ND/OK SECTION Case SECTION 4 As of 04 24 PM CST Page 5 of 8 (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED Samuel J Schiller (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED V. SECTION DefendantSECTION Owasso Independent School District No. I-011 separately, and as Dale Johnson in his official capacity as Superintendent, as Rick Dossett in his official capacity as Principal, and as John Scott in his official capacity as Athletic Director TERMINATED also known as Owasso Public Schools SECTION DefendantSECTION Dale Johnson individually TERMINATED SECTION DefendantSECTION Rick Dossett individually TERMINATED SECTION DefendantSECTION represented by J Douglas Mann Rosenstein Fist &Ringold 525 S MAIN STE 700 TULSA, OK 74103 Fax Email [email protected] TERMINATED LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED Karen Lea Long Rosenstein Fist &Ringold 525 S MAIN STE 700 TULSA, OK 74103 Fax Email [email protected] TERMINATED LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED represented by J Douglas Mann (See above for address) TERMINATED LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED Karen Lea Long (See above for address) TERMINATED LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED represented by J Douglas Mann (See above for address) TERMINATED LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED Karen Lea Long (See above for address) TERMINATED LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED represented by USDC ND/OK SECTION Case SECTION 4 As of 04 24 PM CST Page 6 of 8 John Scott individually TERMINATED J Douglas Mann (See above for address) TERMINATED LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED Karen Lea Long (See above for address) TERMINATED LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED SECTION DefendantSECTION John Doe Does 1 through 50 Date Filed # Docket Text 1 COMPLAINT (Summons(es) issued); forms given (fee status pd) (C2J). (fe, Dpty Clk) (Entered WAIVER OF SERVICE OF SUMMONS by defendant Rick Dossett on mailed on (lmc, Dpty Clk) (Entered WAIVER OF SERVICE OF SUMMONS by defendant Dale Johnson on mailed on (lmc, Dpty Clk) (Entered WAIVER OF SERVICE OF SUMMONS by defendant John Scott on mailed (lmc, Dpty Clk) (Entered WAIVER OF SERVICE OF SUMMONS by defendant Owasso Sch Dist I011 on (fe, Dpty Clk) (Entered 2 ANSWER by defendant Owasso Sch Dist I011 to 1-1 Complaint (lmc, Dpty Clk) (Entered 3 ATTORNEY APPEARANCE for defendants Owasso Sch Dist I011, Dale Johnson, Rick Dossett, and John Scott by Karen L Long, J Douglas Mann (lmc, Dpty Clk) (Entered 4 ANSWER by defendant Dale Johnson to 1-1 Complaint (lmc, Dpty Clk) (Entered 5 ANSWER by defendant Rick Dossett to 1-1 Complaint (lmc, Dpty Clk) (Entered 6 ANSWER by defendant John Scott to 1-1 Complaint (lmc, Dpty Clk) (Entered MINUTE ORDER STATUS HRG/CASE MANAGEMENT CONFERENCE set for 9 30 before Judge Terry C. Kern (cc all counsel) (cds, Dpty Clk) (Entered 7 MOTION by plaintiff Ron Randolph, plaintiff Coy E Brown, plaintiff Candace L Brown, plaintiff Robert C Parker, plaintiff Susan J Parker, plaintiff Robert F Randolph Jr, plaintiff Vicki L Randolph, plaintiff Jim Pigg, plaintiff Kay Pigg, plaintiff Tom Martin, plaintiff Becky Martin to certify class action (O2lc) (crp, Dpty Clk) (Entered 8 BRIEF by plaintiff Ron Randolph, plaintiff Coy E Brown, plaintiff Candace L Brown, plaintiff Robert C Parker, plaintiff Susan J Parker, plaintiff Robert F Randolph Jr, plaintiff Vicki L Randolph, plaintiff Jim Pigg, plaintiff Kay Pigg, plaintiff Tom Martin, plaintiff Becky Martin in support of motion to certify class action (C2lc) 7-1 (crp, Dpty Clk) (Entered 9 RESPONSE by defendant Owasso Sch Dist I011, defendant Dale Johnson, defendant Rick Dossett, defendant John Scott to motion to certify class action USDC ND/OK SECTION Case SECTION 4 As of 04 24 PM CST Page 7 of 8 7-1 (pll, Dpty Clk) (Entered CASE MANAGEMENT PLAN Received (pll, Dpty Clk) (Entered CASE MANAGEMENT PLAN Received (pll, Dpty Clk) (Entered MINUTES Case Management Conference held by Judge Terry C. Kern granting motion to certify class action 7-1 Parties to submit agreed Proposed Order of Class Certification; Court advised by counsel that settlement is anticipated Initial discl. of known witn. &exhs. by ddl set for dispositive motion and motion in limine filing ddl set for Final witn. &exhs. to be exch. by depo. designations by pretrial order ddl set for ; PRETRIAL CONF set for 10 30 ; Proposed F/F, C/L and Briefs due set for 9 30 Settlement Conf. requested after 7/1/96 before Magistrate Judge (ett 3-4 weeks) (ES-Rptr) (cc all counsel) (cds, Dpty Clk) (Entered PROPOSED Order re class action certification (pll, Dpty Clk) (Entered 10 ORDER by Judge Terry C. Kern granting motion to certify class action 7-1 (cc all counsel) (pll, Dpty Clk) (Entered 11 ORDER by Magistrate Frank H. McCarthy SETTLMT CONF set for 1 15 9/3/96 before Magistrate Frank H. McCarthy; statements are due by (cc all counsel) (jcm, Dpty Clk) (Entered MINUTE ORDER STATUS HRG set for 9 30 (cc all counsel) (cds, Dpty Clk) (Entered MINUTES by Judge Terry C. Kern Status hearing held Parties advise Court that consent Decree is near completion. Major issue to resolve will be attorneys fees; fee issue to be argued before the Magistrate Judge (ES-Rptr) (cds, Dpty Clk) (Entered MINUTES by Magistrate Frank H. McCarthy settlement conference held on settlement is pending. (jcm, Dpty Clk) (Entered 12 EXHIBIT list by plaintiffs (pll, Dpty Clk) (Entered 13 WITNESS list by plaintiffs (pll, Dpty Clk) (Entered MINUTES by Magistrate Frank H. McCarthy a follow-up sett conf was held on the case has settled w/the exception of the attorney fees issue. (jcm, Dpty Clk) (Entered PROPOSED Consent Decree to Judge (cds, Dpty Clk) (Entered 14 ORDER/Consent Decree by Judge Terry C. Kern terminating case ; see order for details (cc all counsel) (pll, Dpty Clk) (Entered 15 MOTION by plaintiffs for attorney fees (c2lc) (fe, Dpty Clk) (Entered 16 BRIEF by plaintiffs in support of their motion for attorney fees 15-1 (fe, Dpty Clk) (Entered BILL OF COSTS submitted by plaintiffs and agnst defendants in the amount of COST HRG set for 10 00 a.m. on before the Court Clerk (lmc, Dpty Clk) (Entered 17 RESPONSE by defendant Owasso Sch Dist I011 to motion for attorney fees 15-1 (pll, Dpty Clk) (Entered 18 REPLY by plaintiffs to dfdts' response in opposition to plas' motion for attorney fees 15-1 (fe, Dpty Clk) (Entered 19 COSTS taxed by Court Clerk for pla in the amount of against defendant Owasso Sch Dist I011 (cc all counsel) (fe, Dpty Clk) (Entered USDC ND/OK SECTION Case SECTION 4 As of 04 24 PM CST Page 8 of 8 20 JOINT STIPULATION of dismissal w/ prejudice of individual defendants by plas and dfdts Owasso Independent School Dist, Johnson, Dossett, Scott (fe, Dpty Clk) (Entered 21 NOTICE by Samuel Schiller, atty for plaintiff, of change of address to P O Box 159, Haskell, OK 74436 (fe, Dpty Clk) (Entered 22 ORDER by Chief Judge Terry C. Kern granting pla's motion for attorney fees 15-1 ; atty fees granted in amt of (cc all counsel) (fe, Dpty Clk) (Entered 23 JUDGMENT by Chief Judge Terry C. Kern in accordance with order filed contemporaneously herewith; pla to recover from dfdts for atty fees and litigation expenses, with post-jgmt interest at rate of 6.06% as provided by law (cc all counsel) (fe, Dpty Clk) (Entered 24 NOTICE (COMPLIANCE REPORT) by defendant Owasso Sch Dist I011 (fe, Dpty Clk) (Entered 25 CERTIFICATEI OF COMPLIANCE w/ consent decree by defendant Owasso Sch Dist I011 (fe, Dpty Clk) (Entered Summary: On February 15, 1996, students filed a class action lawsuit against Owasso Independent School District ( OPS ), claiming that it had violated Title IX of the Education Amendment of 1972, the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution and 42 U.S.C. § 1983 by intentionally denying female students an equal opportunity to participate in interscholastic and other school-sponsored athletics. On October 2, 1996, the Court entered a consent decree, which settled each of the claims stated in the Complaint and resolved all claims asserted against individuals who were named in their official and individual capacities, dismissing claims for damages.

On February 15, 1996, students filed a class action lawsuit against Owasso Independent School District ( OPS ), claiming that it had violated Title IX of the Education Amendment of 1972, the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution and 42 U.S.C. § 1983 by intentionally denying female students an equal opportunity to participate in interscholastic and other school-sponsored athletics. On October 2, 1996, the Court entered a consent decree, which settled each of the claims stated in the Complaint and resolved all claims asserted against individuals who were named in their official and individual capacities, dismissing claims for damages.

Using the provided source, generate a concise summary: SECTION SECTION Case SECTION 3 As of 07 59 PM PDT 1 of 7 CLOSED,PROTO U.S. District Court Southern District of California (San Diego) CIVIL DOCKET FOR CASE # 3 U S Equal Employment Opportunity Commission v. Hometown Buffet Inc et al Assigned to Judge Michael M. Anello Referred to Magistrate Judge Jan M. Adler Cause 42 2000e SECTION PlaintiffSECTION Date Filed Date Terminated Jury Demand None Nature of Suit 442 Civil Rights Jobs Jurisdiction U.S. Government SECTION PlaintiffSECTION U S Equal Employment Opportunity Commission represented by Anna Y Park US Equal Employment Opportunity Commission 255 East Temple Street Fourth Floor Los Angeles, CA 90012 Fax Email [email protected] LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED Connie K Liem US Equal Employment Opportunity Commission 555 West Beech Street Suite 504 San Diego, CA 92101 Fax Email [email protected] LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED Lorena Garcia United States Equal Employment Opportunity Commission 255 East Temple Street 4th Floor Los Angeles, CA 90012 Fax Email [email protected] LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED Karen E Nutter United States Equal Employment Opportunity Commission 255 East Temple Street 4th Floor Los Angeles, CA 90012 Email [email protected] TERMINATED ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED V. SECTION DefendantSECTION SECTION Case SECTION 3 As of 07 59 PM PDT 2 of 7 Hometown Buffet Inc represented by Charles T Hoge Kirby Noonan Lance and Hoge 350 Tenth Avenue Suite 1300 San Diego, CA 92101 Fax Email [email protected] LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED Lauren E Litteken Kirby, Noonan, Lance and Hoge LLP 350 Tenth Avenue Suite 1300 San Diego, CA Email [email protected] LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED SECTION DefendantSECTION DOES 1-10 Date Filed # Docket Text 1 COMPLAINT against Hometown Buffet Inc; jury trial demand, filed by U S Equal Employment Opportunity Commission.(tkl, ) Modified fee record on (kmm). (Entered 2 NOTICE of Party With Financial Interest by U S Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (tkl, ) (Entered 3 Summons Issued (tkl, ) (Entered 4 WAIVER OF SERVICE Returned Executed by U S Equal Employment Opportunity Commission. Hometown Buffet Inc waiver sent on answer due (Attachments # 1 Proof of Service executed waiver of service of summons)(Liem, Connie) (Entered 5 MOTION for Summary Judgment by Hometown Buffet Inc. (Attachments # 1 Declaration Jim Hanneman)(Hoge, Charles) (Entered 6 NOTICE by Hometown Buffet Inc Re-Notice of Motion for Summary Judgment (Hoge, Charles) (Entered 7 RESPONSE in Opposition re 5 MOTION for Summary Judgment filed by U S Equal Employment Opportunity Commission. (Attachments # 1 Memo of Points and Authorities # 2 Statement of Facts EEOC's# 3 Exhibit A-E# 4 Exhibit F-J# 5 Supplement EEOC's Objections and Request to Strike SECTION DefendantSECTION's Evidence)(Liem, Connie) (Entered 8 REPLY to Response to Motion re 5 MOTION for Summary Judgment filed by Hometown Buffet Inc. (Attachments # 1 SECTION DefendantSECTION's Objections to Evidence)(Hoge, Charles) (Entered 9 NOTICE of Hearing on Motion 5 MOTION for Summary Judgment Motion Hearing set for 11 00 AM before Judge Jeffrey T. Miller. (llb, ) (Entered 10 NOTICE of Hearing on Motion for Summary Judgment Motion Hearing reset for 11 00 AM in Courtroom 6 before Judge Jeffrey T. Miller. (llb, ) (Entered 11 Minute Entry for proceedings held before Judge Jeffrey T. Miller Motion Hearing held on re 5 MOTION for Summary Judgment filed by Hometown Buffet SECTION Case SECTION 3 As of 07 59 PM PDT 3 of 7 Inc,. Motion submitted. (Court Reporter Melinda Settermen).(SECTION PlaintiffSECTION Attorney Karen Nuttert).(SECTION DefendantSECTION Attorney Charles Hoge, Lauren Butz). (llb, ) (Entered 12 ORDER denying dft's motion for partial summary adjudication; granting pla's cross motion for partial summary adjudication 5. Signed by Judge Jeffrey T. Miller on (tkl, ) (Entered 13 ANSWER to Complaint by Hometown Buffet Inc.(Hoge, Charles) (Entered 14 ORDER signed by Judge Jan M. Adler on Early Neutral Evaluation set for 10 00 AM in Courtroom D before Magistrate Judge Jan M. Adler.(tkl, ) (Entered 15 Minute Entry for proceedings held before Judge Jan M. Adler Early Neutral Evaluation Conference held on Court to issue order. (SECTION PlaintiffSECTION Attorney Anna Y Park/Connie Liem/Karen Nutter).(SECTION DefendantSECTION Attorney Charles T Hoge/Laura Butz). (hh) (Entered 16 ORDER signed by Judge Jan M. Adler on The Court convened ENE Conf on at 10 00AM. Telephonic Case Management Conference set for 09 00 AM in Courtroom D before Magistrate Judge Jan M. Adler.(tkl, ) (Entered 17 Minute Entry for proceedings held before Judge Jan M. Adler Case Management Conference held on Court to issue Order. (SECTION PlaintiffSECTION Attorney Karen Nutter).(SECTION DefendantSECTION Attorney Charles T Hoge). (hh) (Entered 18 Case Management Conference ORDER Regulating Discovery and Other Pretrial Proceedings. Telephonic case Management Conference held Telephonic Case Management Conference set for 09 30 AM before Magistrate Judge Jan M. Adler. Mandatory Settlement Conference set for 10 00 AM before Magistrate Judge Jan M. Adler. Final Pretrial Conference set for 08 30 AM in Courtroom 6 before Judge Jeffrey T. Miller. Jury Trial set for 10 00 AM in Courtroom 6 before Judge Jeffrey T. Miller. Signed by Judge Jan M. Adler on (jcj) (Entered 19 Minute Entry for proceedings held before Judge Jan M. Adler Case Management Conference held on Court to issue Order. (SECTION PlaintiffSECTION Attorney Karen Nutter). (SECTION DefendantSECTION Attorney Lauren Butz). (hh) (Entered 20 ORDER re telephonic Case Managment Conferences. On October 2, 2007, the Court held a telephonic Case Management Conference. A telephonic Case Management Conference set for 09 30 PM in Courtroom D before Magistrate Judge Jan M. Adler. Signed by Judge Jan M. Adler on (tkl)(mam). (Entered 21 Joint MOTION to Strike Portions of SECTION PlaintiffSECTION's Complaint by U S Equal Employment Opportunity Commission. (Nutter, Karen) (Entered 22 ORDER re discovery.The Court hereby orders that Randy Young shall be excluded from attendance at the deposition of Julia Lopez. Signed by Judge Jan M. Adler on (tkl)(bar ). (Entered 23 Joint MOTION for Extension of Time to Complete Discovery by U S Equal Employment Opportunity Commission. (Nutter, Karen) (tkl, ). (Entered 24 ORDER granting in part and denying in part 23 SECTION PlaintiffSECTION s and SECTION DefendantSECTION s joint motion to continue discovery cut-off dates and the motion-filing deadline. Signed by Judge Jan M. Adler on (tkl)(mam). (Entered 25 Minute Entry for proceedings held before Judge Jan M. Adler Case Management Conference held on Court to issue Order. (SECTION PlaintiffSECTION Attorney Karen Nutter).(SECTION DefendantSECTION Attorneys Charles T Hoge & Lauren Butz). (hh) (Entered 26 ORDER. Telephonic Case Management Conference was held on Telephonic Case Management Conference set for 09 30 AM in Courtroom D before Magistrate Judge Jan M. Adler. Signed by Magistrate Judge Jan M. Adler on SECTION Case SECTION 3 As of 07 59 PM PDT 4 of 7 (jah) (Entered 27 NOTICE by Hometown Buffet Inc OF FILING CHAPTER 11 REORGANIZATION AND AUTOMATIC STAY PURSUANT TO 11 U.S.C. SECTION 362 (Hoge, Charles) (tkl, ). (Entered 28 NOTICE by U S Equal Employment Opportunity Commission EEOC'S POSITION REGARDING DEFENDANT'S NOTICE OF FILING CHAPTER 11 REORGANIZATION AND AUTOMATIC STAY PURSUANT TO 11 U.S.C. §362 (Liem, Connie) (tkl, ). Emailed atty. Capitalization should not be used. (Entered 29 Joint MOTION for Order (to Process Stipulation) and Rescheduling Dates by Hometown Buffet Inc. (Attachments # 1 Stipulation to Continue Pre-Trial and Related Trial Dates and Proposed Order)(Hoge, Charles). Modified on (tkl, ). Emailed atty. Proposed orders should be emailed to Chambers. (Entered 31 Stipulation and order to continue Pre-trial and related trial dates.Mandatory Settlement Conference set for 10 00 AM in Courtroom D before Magistrate Judge Jan M. Adler; Trial set for 10 00 AM in Courtroom 16 before Judge Jeffrey T. Miller; Pretrial Conference set for 08 30 AM in Courtroom 16 before Judge Jeffrey T. Miller. Signed by Judge Jan M. Adler on (av1, ). (Entered 30 ORDER re telephonic CMC. The Court will conduct a telephonic Case Management Conference set for 09 30 AM in Courtroom D before Magistrate Judge Jan M. Adler. Signed by Judge Jan M. Adler on (tkl) (av1, ). (Entered 32 NOTICE by U S Equal Employment Opportunity Commission of Withdrawal for Government Attorney Karen Nutter; Certificate of Service (Park, Anna) (tkl, ). (Entered 33 NOTICE of Appearance by Anna Y Park on behalf of U S Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (Park, Anna) (tkl, ). (Entered 34 ORDER rescheduling telephonic CMC. Due to a change in the Courts calendar, the telephonic Case Management Conference previously scheduled to be held on at 9 30 a.m. is vacated and reset to 6/9/08 at 2 30 p.m. in Courtroom D before Magistrate Judge Jan M. Adler. Signed by Magistrate Judge Jan M. Adler on (tkl) (kaj). (Entered 35 Stipulated PROTECTIVE ORDER on Medical and personnel records. Signed by Magistrate Judge Jan M. Adler on (lao)(kaj). (Entered 36 MOTION for Summary Adjudication by Hometown Buffet Inc. (Attachments # 1 Notice Motion for Summary Adjudication, # 2 Memo of Points and Authorities in support of Motion for Summary Adjudication, # 3 Statement of Facts in support of Motion for Summary Adjudication, # 4 Declaration of Randall Young in support of Motion for Summary Adjudication, # 5 Declaration of Lauren E. Butz in support of Motion for Summary Adjudication, # 6 Declaration of Lauren E. Butz in support of Motion for Summary Adjudication, # 7 Proof of Service of Motion for Summary Adjudication and supporting documents)(Hoge, Charles) (tkl). (Entered 37 Minute Entry for proceedings held before Magistrate Judge Jan M. Adler Case Management Conference held on (SECTION PlaintiffSECTION Attorneys Connie K Liem & Derrick Lee).(SECTION DefendantSECTION Attorneys Charles T Hoge & Lauren Butz).(hh) (Entered 38 RESPONSE in Opposition re 36 MOTION for Summary Adjudication - EEOC's Notice of Opposition to Def. Motion for Summary Judgment on Julia Lopez' Claim filed by U S Equal Employment Opportunity Commission. (Attachments # 1 Memo of Points and Authorities, # 2 EEOC's Statement of Facts in Opposition to Def. MSJ, # 3 EEOC's Response & Obj. to Def. Statement of Facts, # 4 Declaration of EEOC Counsel re Exhibits, # 5 Exhibits 26, and 30-39 (Part 1 of 3), # 6 Exhibits 40-42 (Part 2 of 3), # 7 Exhbits 43 to 49 (Part 3 of Anna). Modified on (tkl). Emailed atty re S/. (Entered SECTION Case SECTION 3 As of 07 59 PM PDT 5 of 7 39 RESPONSE in Opposition re 36 MOTION for Summary Adjudication - EEOC's Certificate of Service of Pleadings Filed in Opposition to SECTION DefendantSECTION's Motion for Summary Judgment on Julia Lopez' Claims filed by U S Equal Employment Opportunity Commission. (Park, Anna) (Entered 40 NOTICE by U S Equal Employment Opportunity Commission re Joint Notice on the Status of Case and Hearing Dates on Dispositive Motions (Attachments # 1 Proof of Service of Joint Notice On the Status of Case and Hearing Dates on Dispositive Motions)(Liem, Connie) (tkl). (Entered 41 MOTION for Summary Adjudication on SECTION DefendantSECTION's First, Second, Fourth, Fifth, Sixth, Seventh, Eighth, Tenth, Thirteenth, Twenty-third, and Twenty-fourth Affirmative Defenses by U S Equal Employment Opportunity Commission. (Attachments # 1 Memo of Points and Authorities, # 2 Statement of Facts, # 3 Declaration Connie Liem, # 4 Exhibit 1, # 5 Exhibit 6, # 6 Certificate of Service)(Liem, Connie) (Entered 42 MOTION for Summary Adjudication of Issues Related to Vanessa Sisk Claims by Hometown Buffet Inc. (Attachments # 1 Memo of Points and Authorities in Support of Motion for Summary Adjudication re Vanessa Sisk, # 2 Statement of Facts in Support of Summary Adjudication re Claims of Vanessa Sisk, # 3 Declaration of Charles T. Hoge, # 4 Exhibit A and B to Hoge Declaration, # 5 Proof of Service)(Hoge, Charles) (tkl). (Entered 43 MOTION for Summary Adjudication of Issues Related to Samantha Sisk Claims by Hometown Buffet Inc. (Attachments # 1 Memo of Points and Authorities in Support of Summary Adjudication of Issues related to Samantha Sisk, # 2 Statement of Facts in Support of Summary Adjudication re Samantha Sisk, # 3 Declaration in Support of Summary Adjudication re claims of Samantha Sisk, # 4 Exhibit to Declaration of Charles T. Hoge, # 5 Proof of Service)(Hoge, Charles) (tkl). (Entered 44 REPLY to 38 RESPONSE in Opposition to 36 MOTION for Summary Adjudication re Rape Allegations of Julia Lopez, filed by Hometown Buffet Inc. (Attachments # 1 Declaration of Lauren Butz in Support of Reply, # 2 Exhibit to Lauren Butz Declaration, # 3 Proof of Service)(Hoge, Charles) Modified to correct document description (pdc). (tkl). (Entered 45 MOTION for Partial Summary Judgment & Notice of Motion by U S Equal Employment Opportunity Commission. (Attachments # 1 Memo of Points and Authorities, # 2 Statement of Facts, # 3 Declaration, # 4 Exhibits 26, 30-40 (Pt. 1 of 3), # 5 Exhibits 41-45, 47-49 (Pt. 2 of 3), # 6 Exhibits 50-56 (Pt. 3 of 3), # 7 Proof of Service)(Park, Anna) (tkl). (Entered 46 ORDER granting 21 Joint Motion to Strike Portions of Complaint. The court hereby grants the parties joint motion striking portions of SECTION PlaintiffSECTION s complaint. Signed by Judge Jeffrey T. Miller on (asw)(kaj). (Entered 47 ORDER denying 36 dft's Motion for Partial Summary Adjudication. Signed by Judge Jeffrey T. Miller on (tkl) (Entered 48 NOTICE by U S Equal Employment Opportunity Commission re 41 MOTION for Summary Adjudication on SECTION DefendantSECTION's First, Second, Fourth, Fifth, Sixth, Seventh, Eighth, Tenth, Thirteenth, Twenty-third, and Twenty-fourth Affirmative Defenses EEOCs Amended Notice of Motion (Liem, Connie) (tkl). (Entered 49 NOTICE by U S Equal Employment Opportunity Commission re 45 MOTION for Partial Summary Judgment & Notice of Motion EEOC's Amended Notice of Motion (Liem, Connie) (tkl). (Entered 50 MOTION for Summary Adjudication RE-SET by Hometown Buffet Inc. (Attachments # 1 Proof of Service)(Hoge, Charles) (tkl). Modified on to term motion, document is a renotice of the motion hearing (nsp). (Entered 51 MOTION for Summary Adjudication Re-Set by Hometown Buffet Inc. (Attachments # 1 Proof of Service)(Hoge, Charles) (tkl). (Entered SECTION Case SECTION 3 As of 07 59 PM PDT 6 of 7 52 ORDER Rescheduling Mandatory Settlement Conference. (Mandatory Settlement Conference continued to 10 00 AM before Magistrate Judge Jan M. Adler.) Signed by Magistrate Judge Jan M. Adler on (lao) (av1). (Entered 53 Joint MOTION to Continue Pre-Trial and Trial Dates by Hometown Buffet Inc. (Hoge, Charles) (tkl). (Entered 54 NOTICE of Hearing Telephonic Status Conference set for 11 45 AM in Courtroom 16 before Judge Jeffrey T. Miller. (llb) (Entered 55 Minute Entry for proceedings held before Judge Jeffrey T. Miller Status Conference held on Court will set a date for all dispositive motions. Court allows counsel to reach global resolution to the case. Counsel to file motion re Remedies available to resolve claims. All pending dates before Judge Miller are vacated. Mandatory Settlement conference date of set before Magistrate Judge Adler is confirmed. (Court Reporter Debra Henson).(SECTION PlaintiffSECTION Attorney Connie Liem, Anna Park (Telephonically)).(SECTION DefendantSECTION Attorney Charles Hoge).(llb) (Entered 56 NOTICE of Hearing Status Conference set during hearing held on for 11 00 AM in Courtroom 16 before Judge Jeffrey T. Miller. (llb) (Entered 57 Minute Entry for proceedings held before Magistrate Judge Jan M. Adler For good cause shown, the Mandatory Settlement Conference set to be held October 20, 2008 at 10 00 a.m. is hereby VACATED. (hh) (Entered 58 ORDER rescheduling mandatory settlement conference. Mandatory Settlement Conference set for 10 00 AM in Courtroom D before Magistrate Judge Jan M. Adler. Signed by Magistrate Judge Jan M. Adler on (tkl) (Entered 59 Order of Transfer; case is transferred from the case list of Judge Jeffrey T. Miller to the case list of Judge Michasel M. Anello; all pending dates on the calendar of Judge Miller are vacated and shall be rescheduled by Judge Anello; hearings calendared before the magistrate judge remain as scheduled; new case number Signed by Judge Jeffrey T. Miller on (kaj) (Entered 60 ORDER granting 53 Motion to Continue Pending before the Court is the joint motion of the parties requesting that the Court continue pretrial dates in order to accommodate the dispositive motion hearing date. The Court finds good cause to GRANT the joint motion 53. Accordingly, the Pretrial Conference is hereby SET for March 6, 2009 at 10 00 AM in Courtroom 05 before Judge Michael M. Anello. Signed by Judge Michael M. Anello on (amk) (Entered 61 ORDER Setting Hearing on Motions Pending before the Court in this matter are SECTION PlaintiffSECTION EEOC's motions for summary judgment, and SECTION DefendantSECTION Hometown Buffet's motions for summary judgment 45 MOTION for Partial Summary Judgment & Notice of Motion, 43 MOTION for Summary Adjudication of Issues Related to Samantha Sisk Claims, 41 MOTION for Summary Adjudication on SECTION DefendantSECTION's First, Second, Fourth, Fifth, Sixth, Seventh, Eighth, Tenth, Thirteenth, Twenty-third, and Twenty-fourth Affirmative Defenses, 42 MOTION for Summary Adjudication of Issues Related to Vanessa Sisk Claims. The previously scheduled November 21, 2008 hearing date on the motions is vacated subsequent to the transfer of this case to presiding District Judge Anello. Accordingly, the Motions Hearing Date is hereby SET for January 16, 2009 at 2 30 PM in Courtroom 05 before Judge Michael M. Anello. Signed by Judge Michael M. Anello on (amk) (Entered 62 Minute Entry for proceedings held before Judge Michael M. Anello The previously scheduled December 8, 2008 trial date is hereby vacated subsequent to the transfer of this case to presiding District Judge Anello. The trial date shall be reset during or before the March 6, 2009 Pretrial Conference. (amk) (Entered 63 Minute Entry for proceedings held before Magistrate Judge Jan M. Adler Mandatory Settlement Conference held on (SECTION PlaintiffSECTION Attorneys Connie Liem, Anna Park, Lorena Garcia). (SECTION DefendantSECTION Attorneys Charles Hoge, Lauren Butz, Sara SECTION Case SECTION 3 As of 07 59 PM PDT 7 of 7 Reindel). (ale) (Entered 64 Joint MOTION to Continue All Pre-Trial Dates; and Certificate of Service by U S Equal Employment Opportunity Commission. (Garcia, Lorena) (jpp). (Entered 65 ORDER granting Joint Motion for continuance on all pre-trial dates. Hearing date on the Parties' dispositive motions is reset to at 2 30pm, and Pre-Trial Conference reset to at 2 30pm in Courtroom by Judge Michael M. Anello on (jpp) (Entered 66 Joint MOTION to Continue Hearing Dates by Hometown Buffet Inc. (Butz, Lauren) (leh). (Entered 67 ORDER granting 66 Joint Motion to Continue Pre-Trial Dates. For good cause being shown, the Joint Motion is granted. Accordingly, the motions hearing date is reset to at 2 30 PM, and the Final Pretrial Conference is reset for 02 30 PM in Courtroom 05. Signed by Judge Michael M. Anello on (leh) (Entered 68 Joint MOTION to Continue All Pre-Trial-dates by U S Equal Employment Opportunity Commission. (Liem, Connie)(leh). (Entered 69 ORDER granting 68 Joint Motion to Continue Motions Hearing Date reset for August 31, 2009 at 2 30 PM in Courtroom 5. Final Pretrial Conference reset for October 5, 2009 at 2 30 PM in Courtroom 5 before Judge Michael M. Anello. Signed by Judge Michael M. Anello on (amk) (Entered 70 NOTICE of Settlement ;Prop. Consent Decree and Order, Cert. of Service by U S Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (Attachments # 1 Proposed Consent Decree)(Liem, Connie) Modified on atty contacted re proposed orders not to be filed in ecf system (leh). (Entered 71 ORDER on Consent Decree re 70 Notice of Settlement filed by U S Equal Employment Opportunity Commission. The Court has reviewed the terms of the Consent Decree and hereby deems the provisions set forth herein are fair and serves the public interest. The Court shall retain jurisdiction of this matter for the term of the Decree. Compliance with all provisions therefore is hereby ordered, adjudged and decreed. Signed by Judge Michael M. Anello on (leh) (Entered 72 CLERK'S JUDGMENT IT IS SO ORDERED AND ADJUDGED that the Court has reviewed the terms of the Consent Decree and hereby deems the provisions set forth are fair and serves the public interest. Compliance with all provisions therefore is hereby ordered, adjudged and decreed. (leh) (av1). (Entered Summary: On September 29, 2006, the Los Angeles District Office of the EEOC filed this suit in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of California. The plaintiffs sued Hometown Buffet Inc. under for violation of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. Specifically, the plaintiffs alleged sexual harassment and a hostile work environment. On July 22, 2009, Judge Michael M. Anello approved the proposed consent decree put forth by the parties. Its effective period was two years, and there is nothing more on the docket - so presumably the matter ended in 2011.

On September 29, 2006, the Los Angeles District Office of the EEOC filed this suit in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of California. The plaintiffs sued Hometown Buffet Inc. under for violation of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. Specifically, the plaintiffs alleged sexual harassment and a hostile work environment. On July 22, 2009, Judge Michael M. Anello approved the proposed consent decree put forth by the parties. Its effective period was two years, and there is nothing more on the docket - so presumably the matter ended in 2011.

Using the provided source, generate a concise summary: SECTION ECF,MAGCONSENT,MEMBER,RELATED U.S. District Court Southern District of New York (Foley Square) CIVIL DOCKET FOR CASE # 1 Betances v. Fischer et al Assigned to Magistrate Judge Robert W. Lehrburger Lead case 1 Member case (View Member Case) Related SECTION Case SECTION 1 Case in other court US Court of Appeals, Second Circuit, U.S. Court of Appeals, Second Circuit, Cause 42 1983 Civil Rights Act Date Filed Jury Demand Both Nature of Suit 440 Civil Rights Other Jurisdiction Federal Question SECTION PlaintiffSECTION Paul Betances Individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated represented by Matthew D. Brinckerhoff Emery Celli Brinckerhoff Abady Ward & Maazel LLP 600 Fifth Avenue New York, NY 10020 Fax Email [email protected] LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED Nicholas Bourland Emery Celli Brinckerhoff Abady Ward & Maazel LLP 600 Fifth Avenue 10th Floor 10020 New York, NY 10028 Fax Email [email protected] LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED Adam R Pulver Public Citizen Litigation Group 1600 20th Street, N.W. Washington, DC 20009 Fax Email [email protected] TERMINATED Alanna Gayle Kaufman Kaufman Lieb Lebowitz & Frick LLP 10 E. 40th Street Suite 3307 New York, NY 10016 Email [email protected] TERMINATED ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED David A Lebowitz Kaufman Lieb Lebowitz & Frick LLP 10 East 40th Street Suite 3307 New York, NY 10016 Email [email protected] ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED Emma Lerner Freeman Emery Celli Brinckerhoff Abady Ward & Maazel LLP 600 Fifth Avenue 10th Floor New York, NY 10020 Fax Email [email protected] ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED Hayley Horowitz Emery Celli Brinckerhoff & Abady LLP 75 Rockefeller Plaza New York, NY 10019 SECTION PlaintiffSECTION Lloyd A. Barnes SECTION PlaintiffSECTION Gabriel Velez Individually and on behalf of others similarly situated. Fax Email [email protected] TERMINATED represented by Matthew D. Brinckerhoff (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED Adam R Pulver (See above for address) TERMINATED Alanna Gayle Kaufman (See above for address) TERMINATED ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED David A Lebowitz (See above for address) ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED Emma Lerner Freeman (See above for address) ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED Hayley Horowitz Emery Celli Brinckerhoff & Abady, LLP 600 Fifth Avenue 10th Floor New York, NY 10020 Fax Email [email protected] TERMINATED Nicholas Bourland (See above for address) ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED represented by Matthew D. Brinckerhoff (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY also known as Gabriel Belize V. SECTION DefendantSECTION Brian Fischer Individually ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED Adam R Pulver (See above for address) TERMINATED Alanna Gayle Kaufman (See above for address) TERMINATED ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED David A Lebowitz (See above for address) ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED Emma Lerner Freeman (See above for address) ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED Hayley Horowitz (See above for address) TERMINATED ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED Nicholas Bourland (See above for address) ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED represented by Michael J. Keane Office of The Attorney General(NYS) 28 Liberty Street, 21st Floor New York, NY 10005 (212) Fax Email [email protected] LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED Anna Hehenberger New York State Office of the Attorney General 120 Broadway New York, NY 10271 Fax Email [email protected] ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED Barbara Kathryn Hathaway New York State Office of the Attorney General (28 Liberty) 28 Liberty Street, 15th Floor New York, NY 10005 Fax Email [email protected] TERMINATED Christina Chinwe Okereke D.C. Office of the Attorney General 400 6th Street NW Washington, DC 20001 Fax Email [email protected] TERMINATED Daniel A. Schulze New York State Office of the Attorney General (28 Liberty) 28 Liberty Street, 15th Floor New York, NY 10005 Fax Email [email protected] ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED James Brennan Cooney NYS Office of The Attorney General 28 Liberty Street New York, NY 10005 Fax Email james.cooney Summary: Persons in the custody of the New York State Department of Correctional Services (DOCS) brought this class action against DOCS and the New York State Division of Parole (DOP) for the extra-judicial imposition of sentences requiring post-release supervision. The defendants' motion to dismiss was denied by the District Court, and the Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit affirmed. The defendants' motion for summary judgment was granted with respect to several defendants, but denied on the issue of qualified immunity; and plaintiffs' cross motion for partial summary judgment on the issue of liability for three officers was granted. The defendants appealed the qualified immunity decision, but the Second Circuit affirmed. On remand, the defendants moved for summary judgment again, but that motion was denied. The case is currently scheduled for trial in Summer 2021.

Persons in the custody of the New York State Department of Correctional Services (DOCS) brought this class action against DOCS and the New York State Division of Parole (DOP) for the extra-judicial imposition of sentences requiring post-release supervision. The defendants' motion to dismiss was denied by the District Court, and the Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit affirmed. The defendants' motion for summary judgment was granted with respect to several defendants, but denied on the issue of qualified immunity; and plaintiffs' cross motion for partial summary judgment on the issue of liability for three officers was granted. The defendants appealed the qualified immunity decision, but the Second Circuit affirmed. On remand, the defendants moved for summary judgment again, but that motion was denied. The case is currently scheduled for trial in Summer 2021.

Using the provided source, generate a concise summary: SECTION 243 F.3d 846 (2001) EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY COMMISSION, SECTION PlaintiffSECTION -Appellant, and Francisco G. Santana, SECTION PlaintiffSECTION, v. SEARS ROEBUCK AND COMPANY, SECTION DefendantSECTION -Appellee. Francisco G. Santana, SECTION PlaintiffSECTION -Appellant, and Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, SECTION PlaintiffSECTION, v. Sears Roebuck and Company, SECTION DefendantSECTION -Appellee. Nos. United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit. Argued December 6, 2000. Decided March 16, 2001. 847 *847 ARGUED Robert John Gregory, Office of General Counsel, Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, Washington, DC, ON BRIEF C. Gregory Stewart, General Counsel, Philip B. Sklover, Associate General Counsel, Lorraine C. Davis, Assistant General Counsel, Lisa J. Banks, Office of General Counsel, Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, Washington, D.C., for Appellants. James Bernard Spears, Jr., Haynsworth, Baldwin, Johnson & Greaves, L.L.C., Charlotte, North Carolina, Jerry H. Walters, Jr., Haynsworth, Baldwin, Johnson & Greaves, L.L.C., Charlotte, North Carolina, for Appellee. Before NIEMEYER, MICHAEL, and MOTZ, Circuit Judges. Reversed and remanded by published opinion. Judge Diana Gribbon Motz wrote the majority opinion, in which Judge MICHAEL joined. Judge NIEMEYER wrote a dissenting opinion. OPINION DIANA GRIBBON MOTZ, Circuit Judge The Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) brought this Title VII action on behalf of intervenor Francisco Santana, asserting that Sears Roebuck & Co. discriminated against Santana on the basis of national origin when it refused to hire him as a loss prevention associate. The district court granted summary judgment to Sears; Santana and the EEOC now appeal. For the reasons that follow, we reverse. I. Santana, born in Mexico in 1960, has olive skin and speaks with an Hispanic accent. He moved to this country in 1971 and has since become a naturalized citizen of the United States. In 1979, after graduating from high school, Santana enlisted in the United States Marine Corps and has continually served as a Marine since that time. During much of his adult life, Santana has also worked for Sears. In 1985, while he was stationed at a Marine base in Tustin, California, Sears hired Santana as a part-time loss prevention agent to provide undercover store security in its Costa Mesa, California store. Except for a one-year military leave of absence when he was stationed abroad, for the next ten years, Santana continued to work as a part-time loss prevention agent at the Costa Mesa store. In late 1995, the Marines transferred Santana to the Marine Corps Air Station in Cherry Point, North Carolina. In preparation for this transfer in October 1995, Santana visited North Carolina. During his visit, Santana went to the Sears store in Morehead City, North Carolina to inquire about job opportunities for the same position he had held for ten years in California 0907 specifically part-time loss prevention agent. Santana spoke with William Mansfield, the loss prevention manager in the Morehead City store. Mansfield assured Santana that the Morehead City store could use someone with his experience and that there would be a job waiting for him when he arrived. Mansfield then gave Santana a business card with the telephone number of the store's operations manager, Teri Katsekes, and said he would talk to Katsekes about Santana and his background and experience. Upon his return to California, in November 1995, Santana asked the personnel department at the Costa Mesa 848 Sears to send *848 a transfer form to the personnel department at the Morehead City store. The Costa Mesa personnel department prepared the form, dated November 27, 1995, and forwarded it as requested. Santana contacted the Morehead City operations manager, Katsekes, by telephone, in November or early December, 1995. They had a brief conversation in which Santana told Katsekes that he would be available for work in North Caroli Summary: EEOC's Charlotte, NC office filed this lawsuit alleging discrimination based on national origin against the defendant, Sears, Roebuck &amp; Co. in the United States District Court for the Eastern District of North Carolina (Eastern Division) on EEOC alleged on behalf of a job applicant who was a naturalized American of Mexican origin that the defendant refused to hire him because of his national origin and specifically Spanish accent. The district court's granting of summary judgement to the defendant was reversed on appeal. The defendant and the applicant settled and voluntarily dismissed his part of the case, while the EEOC and the defendant entered into a 1-year consent decree, which prohibited national origin discrimination and mandated training and posting of an Equal Employment notice.

EEOC's Charlotte, NC office filed this lawsuit alleging discrimination based on national origin against the defendant, Sears, Roebuck &amp; Co. in the United States District Court for the Eastern District of North Carolina (Eastern Division) on EEOC alleged on behalf of a job applicant who was a naturalized American of Mexican origin that the defendant refused to hire him because of his national origin and specifically Spanish accent. The district court's granting of summary judgement to the defendant was reversed on appeal. The defendant and the applicant settled and voluntarily dismissed his part of the case, while the EEOC and the defendant entered into a 1-year consent decree, which prohibited national origin discrimination and mandated training and posting of an Equal Employment notice.

Using the provided source, generate a concise summary: SECTION SECTION Case SECTION 0 As of 06 45 AM EST 1 of 5 CLOSED,PMH,REF_DISCOV U.S. District Court Southern District of Florida (Ft Lauderdale) CIVIL DOCKET FOR CASE # 0 United States of America v. The State of Florida Assigned to Judge William J. Zloch Referred to Magistrate Judge Patrick M. Hunt Lead case 0 Member case (View Member Case) Cause 42 12182 Americans with Disabilities Act SECTION PlaintiffSECTION Date Filed Date Terminated Jury Demand None Nature of Suit 446 Civil Rights Americans with Disabilities - Other Jurisdiction U.S. Government SECTION PlaintiffSECTION United States of America represented by Beth A. Esposito U.S. Department of Justice Civil Rights Division 950 Pennsylvania Avenue NW Washington, DC 20005 Email [email protected] LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED H. Justin Park US Department of Justice 950 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW - NYA Washington, DC 20530 (202) Email [email protected] LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED Joy Levin Welan U.S. Department of Justice Civil Rights Division 950 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW - NYA Washington, DC 20530 Email [email protected] LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED Veronica Vanessa Harrell-James United States Attorney's Office 99 NE 4 Street Miami, FL 33132 Fax Email [email protected] LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED Travis W. England U.S. Department of Justice Civil Rights Division 950 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW - NYA Washington, DC 20530 Email [email protected] ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED V. SECTION Case SECTION 0 As of 06 45 AM EST 2 of 5 Intervenor SECTION PlaintiffSECTION Disability Rights Florida TERMINATED represented by Molly Jean Paris 1930 Harrison Street Suite 104 Hollywood, FL 33020 Fax Email [email protected] ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED David Allen Boyer Disability Rights Florida 1930 Harrison St. Suite 104 Hollywood, FL 33020 (850) Fax (850) Email [email protected] ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED V. SECTION DefendantSECTION The State of Florida represented by George N. Meros, Jr. Gray Robinson 301 S Bronough Street Suite 600 Post Office Box 11189 Tallahassee, FL 32301 Fax Email [email protected] LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED Andrew T. Sheeran Agency for Health Care Administration Office of the General Counsel 2727 Mahan Drive Building 3, MS #3 Tallahassee, FL 32308 Fax Email [email protected] ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED Leslei Gayle Street Agency for Healthcare Administration Office of the General Counsel 2727 Mahan Drive, MS #3 Tallahassee, FL 32308 Fax Email [email protected] ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED Stuart Fraser Williams Agency for Health Care Administration 2727 Mahan Drive Mail Stop 3 Tallahassee, FL 32308 Fax Email [email protected] SECTION Case SECTION 0 As of 06 45 AM EST 3 of 5 ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED Date Filed # Docket Text 1 COMPLAINT against State of Florida. Filing fees $ USA Filer - No Filing Fee Required, filed by United States of America. (Attachments # 1 Civil Cover Sheet, # 2 Summon(s), # 3 Summon(s), # 4 Certification)(England, Travis) (Entered 2 Judge Assignment to Judge William P. Dimitrouleas and Magistrate Judge Lurana S. Snow (jua) (Entered 3 Civil Action Certification by United States Attorney (jua) (Entered 4 Summons Issued as to The State of Florida. (jua) (Entered 5 Summons Issued as to The State of Florida. (jua) (Entered 6 Order Requiring Joint Scheduling Report. Signed by Judge William P. Dimitrouleas on (ls) (Entered 7 SUMMONS (Affidavit) Returned Executed on 1 Complaint, with a 21 day response/answer filing deadline by United States of America. The State of Florida served on answer due (Welan, Joy) (Entered 8 ANSWER and Affirmative Defenses to Complaint by The State of Florida. Attorney George N. Meros, Jr added to party The State of Florida(pty dft). (Meros, George) (Entered 9 MOTION to Change Venue and Memorandum of Law in Support by The State of Florida. Responses due by (Meros, George) (Entered 10 ORDER TRANSFERRING CASE to Judge Robin S. Rosenbaum for all further proceedings, accepted and signed on Judge William P. Dimitrouleas no longer assigned to case. Signed by Judge William P. Dimitrouleas on (ls) (Entered 11 RESPONSE in Opposition re 9 MOTION to Change Venue and Memorandum of Law in Support filed by United States of America. (England, Travis) (Entered 12 Certification for Transfer Case No Longer Referred to Magistrate Judge Lurana S. Snow. Signed by Magistrate Judge Lurana S. Snow on (tpl) (Entered 13 Motion to Intervene, filed by Disability Rights Florida. (Attachments # 1 Complaint)(Boyer, David) Modified on (mg). (Entered 14 SUPPLEMENT to 13 Intervenor Complaint Civil Cover Sheet by Disability Rights Florida (Boyer, David) (Entered 15 SUPPLEMENT to 13 Intervenor Complaint Summons by Disability Rights Florida (Boyer, David) (Entered 16 Clerks Notice to Filer re 13 Intervenor Complaint. Wrong Event Selected - Document is a Motion; ERROR - The Filer selected the wrong event. A motion event must always be selected when filing a motion. The correction was made by the Clerk. It is not necessary to refile this document. (mg) (Entered 17 Clerks Notice to Filer re Summons(es) cannot be issued. The motion to intervene has not been granted. (mg) (Entered 18 RESPONSE in Support re 9 MOTION to Change Venue and Memorandum of Law in Support filed by The State of Florida. (Meros, George) (Entered 19 REPLY to Response to Motion re 9 MOTION to Change Venue and Memorandum of Law in Support filed by The State of Florida. (ls)(See Image at DE # 18 ) (Entered SECTION Case SECTION 0 As of 06 45 AM EST 4 of 5 20 Clerks Notice to Filer re 18 Response in Support of Motion. Wrong Event Selected; ERROR - The Filer selected the wrong event. The document was re-docketed by the Clerk, see de#19. It is not necessary to refile this document. (ls) (Entered 21 NOTICE of Attorney Appearance by Andrew T. Sheeran on behalf of The State of Florida. Attorney Andrew T. Sheeran added to party The State of Florida(pty dft). (Sheeran, Andrew) (Entered 22 NOTICE of Attorney Appearance by Leslei Gayle Street on behalf of The State of Florida. Attorney Leslei Gayle Street added to party The State of Florida(pty dft). (Street, Leslei) (Entered 23 NOTICE of Attorney Appearance by Stuart Fraser Williams on behalf of The State of Florida. Attorney Stuart Fraser Williams added to party The State of Florida(pty dft). (Williams, Stuart) (Entered 24 SCHEDULING REPORT - Rule 26(f) by United States of America (England, Travis) (Entered 25 RESPONSE in Opposition re 13 Motion to Intervene filed by The State of Florida. (Meros, George) (Entered 26 REPLY to Response to Motion re 13 Motion to Intervene filed by Disability Rights Florida. Attorney Molly Jean Paris added to party Disability Rights Florida(pty intvp). (Paris, Molly) (Entered 27 Clerks Notice to Filer re 26 Reply to Response to Motion. This document does not have a signature. In the future, please remember to add the following to your signature lines s/. Please see our CM/ECF Administrative Procedures for a detailed explanation. It is not necessary to refile this document. If you have any questions with regard to this, or any future filings, please contact (ls) (Entered 28 MOTION for Judgment on the Pleadings by The State of Florida. (Meros, George) (Entered 29 Unopposed MOTION for Extension of Time to File Response/Reply as to 28 MOTION for Judgment on the Pleadings by United States of America. (Attachments # 1 Text of Proposed Order)(Welan, Joy) (Entered 30 PAPERLESS ORDER granting 29 SECTION PlaintiffSECTION's Unopposed Motion for Extension of Time to File Response re 28 SECTION DefendantSECTION's MOTION for Judgment on the Pleadings. SECTION PlaintiffSECTION's Response is now due by Signed by Judge Robin S. Rosenbaum on (kms) (Entered 31 Joint MOTION for Protective Order Governing Confidential Information and Memorandum of Law by United States of America. (Attachments # 1 Exhibit 1 - Qualified Protective Order Governing Confidential Information)(Welan, Joy) (Entered 32 ORDER REFERRING CASE to Magistrate Judge Patrick M. Hunt for Discovery Matters. Signed by Judge Robin S. Rosenbaum on (kms) (Entered 33 Stipulated Protective Order. Signed by Magistrate Judge Patrick M. Hunt on (tjs) (Entered Cases associated. (ar2) (Entered 34 ORDER granting DE 192 Motion for Consolidation of Related Cases in case number A.R. et al., v. Dudek, et al., Case No. and United States v. State of Florida, Case No. are hereby consolidated with each other. Signed by Judge Robin S. Rosenbaum on (ar2) (Entered 35 PAPERLESS ORDER denying as moot 9 Motion to Change Venue in light of 34 Order granting Motion to Consolidate Cases. Signed by Judge Robin S. Rosenbaum on (kms) (Entered SECTION Case SECTION 0 As of 06 45 AM EST 5 of 5 36 ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE directed to Disability Rights Florida, Inc. Show Cause Response due by Please see Order for details. Signed by Judge Robin S. Rosenbaum on (kms) (Entered 37 GENERAL ORDER on Discovery Objections and Procedures Signed by Magistrate Judge Patrick M. Hunt on (vp) (Entered 38 RESPONSE TO ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE re 36 Order to Show Cause by Disability Rights Florida. (Paris, Molly) (Entered 39 ORDER denying 13 Motion to Intervene. Signed by Judge Robin S. Rosenbaum on (ls) (Entered 40 ORDER denying 28 Motion for Judgment on the Pleadings. Signed by Judge Robin S. Rosenbaum on (kms) (Entered 41 CLERKS NOTICE REASSIGNING CASE pursuant to Administrative Order Case reassigned to Judge William J. Zloch for all further proceedings. Judge Robin S. Rosenbaum no longer assigned to case. (mb) (Entered 42 ORDER re Consolidation; Directing Clerk to Close Case for Statistical Purposes. Signed by Judge William J. Zloch on (ls) (Entered Civil Case Terminated. (ls) (Entered Summary: On July 22, 2013, attorneys from United States Department of Justice Civil Rights Division filed a lawsuit in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Florida against the State of Florida. The DOJ alleged that nearly two hundred children with disabilities were unnecessarily segregated from their communities and the general population by the State, which had placed them in nursing homes. The DOJ sought an injunction requiring the State to comply with Title II of the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA), 42 U.S.C. § which, as interpreted by the Supreme Court in Olmstead v. L.C., 527 U.S. 581 forbids the unnecessary institutionalization of disabled individuals, and mandates that their rehabilitative and medical needs be provided in a manner that enables disabled individuals to be independent and integrated members of the community. In June 2014, the case was consolidated with another pending case, which is in the Clearinghouse as

On July 22, 2013, attorneys from United States Department of Justice Civil Rights Division filed a lawsuit in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Florida against the State of Florida. The DOJ alleged that nearly two hundred children with disabilities were unnecessarily segregated from their communities and the general population by the State, which had placed them in nursing homes. The DOJ sought an injunction requiring the State to comply with Title II of the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA), 42 U.S.C. § which, as interpreted by the Supreme Court in Olmstead v. L.C., 527 U.S. 581 forbids the unnecessary institutionalization of disabled individuals, and mandates that their rehabilitative and medical needs be provided in a manner that enables disabled individuals to be independent and integrated members of the community. In June 2014, the case was consolidated with another pending case, which is in the Clearinghouse as

Using the provided source, generate a concise summary: SECTION CIVIL, VDRP-T U.S. District Court Eastern District of California - Live System (Sacramento) CIVIL DOCKET FOR CASE # 2 U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission v. Foam Works, LLC. Assigned to Judge Morrison C. England, Jr Referred to Magistrate Judge Edmund F. Brennan Cause 42 2000 Job Discrimination (Sex) SECTION PlaintiffSECTION Date Filed Jury Demand None Nature of Suit 442 Civil Rights Jobs Jurisdiction U.S. Government SECTION PlaintiffSECTION U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission represented by Angela D. Morrison-GOVT Equal Employment Opportunity Commission 333 South Las Vegas Boulevard Suite 8112 Las Vegas, NV 89101 Fax Email [email protected] LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED Anna Y. Park US Equal Employment Opportunity Commission 255 East Temple Street Fourth Floor Los Angeles, CA 90012 (213) Fax (213) Email [email protected] LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED V. SECTION DefendantSECTION Foam Works, LLC. represented by Erik P Khoobyarian Downey Brand LLP 555 Capitol Mall, 10th Floor Sacramento, CA 95814 (916) x6476 Fax (916) Email [email protected] LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED Date Filed # Docket Text 1 COMPLAINT Civil Rights - Sex Harassment; Retaliation against Foam Works, LLC. by U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission. Attorney Park, Anna Y added.(Park, Anna) (Entered 2 CIVIL COVER SHEET by U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (Park, Anna) (Entered 3 SUMMONS ISSUED as to *Foam Works, LLC.* with answer to complaint due within *20* days. Attorney *Anna Y. Park* *US Equal Employment Opportunity Commission* *255 East Temple Street, 4th Floor* *Los Angeles, CA (Duong, D) (Entered 4 CIVIL NEW CASE DOCUMENTS ISSUED; (Attachments # 1 Consent Forms # 2 VDRP Forms) (Duong, D) (Entered 5 NOTICE - Proof of Service by U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission for 4 Civil New Case Documents for MCE. (Park, Anna) Modified on (Marciel, M). (Entered 6 WAIVER of SERVICE RETURNED EXECUTED by U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission. Attorney Morrison-GOVT, Angela D. added. Foam Works, LLC. waiver sent on answer due (Morrison-GOVT, Angela) (Entered 7 JOINT STATUS REPORT by U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission. (Morrison-GOVT, Angela) (Entered 8 ANSWER to COMPLAINT by Foam Works, LLC.. Attorney Khoobyarian, Erik P added.(Khoobyarian, Erik) (Entered 9 PRETRIAL (STATUS) SCHEDULING ORDER signed by Judge Morrison C. England Jr. on Designation of Expert Witnesses due by Discovery due by Dispositive Motion due by Final Pretrial Conference set for at 03 30 PM and Jury Trial set for at 09 00 AM in Courtroom 3 before Judge Morrison C. England Jr.. Upon the stipulation of the parties in their 7 Joint Status Report this matter is REFERRED to the VDRP. (Deutsch, S) Modified on (Yin, K). (Entered TEXT ONLY ENTRY REMOVAL from VDRP, terminating VDRP party. This case has settled prior to the VDRP process.(Martinez, L) (Entered 11 STIPULATION PROPOSED CONSENT DECREE; ORDER by U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission. (Morrison-GOVT, Angela) (Entered 12 STIPULATION and ORDER re 11 (Proposed) Consent Decree, signed by Judge Morrison C. England Jr. on The provisions of the foregoing Consent Decree are hereby APPROVED and compliance with all provisions thereof is Hereby ORDERED.(Kastilahn, A) (Entered 13 ORDER signed by Judge Morrison C. England Jr. on re Exhibit A - Notice to All Employees pursuant to 12 Consent Decree entered by the USDC. (Kastilahn, A) (Entered Summary: On September 27, 2006, The EEOC filed this lawsuit in the U.S. District Court for the Easter District of California. The plaintiff sued Foam Works, LLC under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 alleging sexual harassment and a hostile work environment. On October 12, 2007, District Judge Morrison C. England approved and ordered a proposed consent decree. The consent decree required the Defendant to pay the complainant in compensatory damages. The Defendant was also required to conduct annual training on harassment, institute a confidential complaint procedure, retain pertinent records, and allow the EEOC to inspect documents with twenty days notice.

On September 27, 2006, The EEOC filed this lawsuit in the U.S. District Court for the Easter District of California. The plaintiff sued Foam Works, LLC under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 alleging sexual harassment and a hostile work environment. On October 12, 2007, District Judge Morrison C. England approved and ordered a proposed consent decree. The consent decree required the Defendant to pay the complainant in compensatory damages. The Defendant was also required to conduct annual training on harassment, institute a confidential complaint procedure, retain pertinent records, and allow the EEOC to inspect documents with twenty days notice.

Using the provided source, generate a concise summary: SECTION SECTION Case SECTION 2 As of 03 25 PM CDT 1 of 6 U.S. District Court Western District of Tennessee (Memphis) CIVIL DOCKET FOR CASE # 2 CLOSED Equal Employment Opportunity Commission v. Sharp Manufacturing Company of America Assigned to Judge S. Thomas Anderson Referred to Chief Magistrate Judge Diane K. Vescovo Cause 42 2000e Job Discrimination (Employment) SECTION PlaintiffSECTION Date Filed Date Terminated Jury Demand SECTION PlaintiffSECTION Nature of Suit 442 Civil Rights Jobs Jurisdiction U.S. Government SECTION PlaintiffSECTION Equal Employment Opportunity Commission represented by Deidre Smith BREWER & BARLOW PLC 1755 Kirby Parkway Suite 110 Memphis, TN 38120 Fax Email [email protected] LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED Faye A. Williams EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY COMMISSION- Memphis 1407 Union Avenue Ste. 901 Memphis, TN 38104 Email [email protected] LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED Gwendolyn Young Reams EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY COMMISSION- Memphis 1407 Union Avenue Ste. 901 Memphis, TN 38104 LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED James Lee EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY COMMISSION- Memphis 1407 Union Avenue Ste. 901 Memphis, TN 38104 LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED Ronald S. Cooper EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY COMMISSION- Memphis 1407 Union Avenue Ste. 901 SECTION Case SECTION 2 As of 03 25 PM CDT 2 of 6 Memphis, TN 38104 LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED Terry L. Beck EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY COMMISSION- Memphis 1407 Union Avenue Ste. 901 Memphis, TN 38104 Fax TERMINATED LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED Steven W. Dills EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY COMMISSION 1407 Union Avenue Suite 901 Memphis, TN 38104 Fax Email [email protected] ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED V. SECTION DefendantSECTION Sharp Manufacturing Company of America a division of Sharp Electronics Corporation represented by Joseph M. Crout EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY COMMISSION- Memphis 1407 Union Avenue Ste. 901 Memphis, TN 38104 Fax Email [email protected] LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED W. Kerby Bowling, II EVANS PETREE, PC 1000 Ridgeway Loop Road Ste. 200 Memphis, TN 38120 Fax Email [email protected] LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED Charles W. Cavagnaro, Jr. EVANS PETREE, PC 1000 Ridgeway Loop Road Ste. 200 Memphis, TN 38120 Fax Email [email protected] SECTION Case SECTION 2 As of 03 25 PM CDT 3 of 6 ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED Date Filed # Docket Text 1 COMPLAINT against Sharp Manufacturing Company of America, filed by Equal Employment Opportunity Commission. (Attachments # 1 Civil Cover Sheet)(cas) (Entered 2 ANSWER to Complaint by Sharp Manufacturing Company of America.(Cavagnaro, Charles) (Entered 3 SETTING LETTER Scheduling Conference set for 09 30 AM in Courtroom 5 - Memphis before Diane K. Vescovo. Please email the proposed joint scheduling order to [email protected] by Monday, October 23, 2006. If the order is approved and filed, the conference will be canceled.Please see Judge Vescovo's Rule 16(b) instructions at www.tnwd.uscourts.gov under Instructions, Procedures and Attachments to Notices.(crv) (Entered 4 SCHEDULING ORDER (SECTION PlaintiffSECTION ) Join Parties and/or Amended Pleadings due by Discovery due by (SECTION DefendantSECTION ) Join Parties and/or Amend Pleadings due by Motions due by Signed by Judge Diane K. Vescovo on (bag, ) (Entered 5 SETTING LETTER Jury Trial set for 09 30 AM in Courtroom 1 - Memphis before J. Daniel Breen. Pretrial Conference set for 09 00 AM in Courtroom 1 - Memphis before J. Daniel Breen. Proposed Joint Pretrial Order due ) (Entered 6 MOTION Modify Scheduing Order re 4 Scheduling Order, Proposed Order submitted by Equal Employment Opportunity Commission. (Attachments # 1 Memorandum in Support of Motion to Modify Scheduling Order# 2 Certificate of Consultation)(Smith, Deidre) (Entered 7 ORDER granting 6 Motion to Modify Scheduling Order. Signed by Magistrate Judge Diane K. Vescovo on (Vescovo, Diane) (Entered Set/Reset Scheduling Order Deadlines Discovery ddl by Dispositive Motions ddl by (ehg, ) (Entered 8 NOTICE to Take Deposition of Arsen H. Manugian, M.D. by Sharp Manufacturing Company of America.(Cavagnaro, Charles) (Entered 9 NOTICE to Take Deposition of W. Lee Moffatt, M.D. by Sharp Manufacturing Company of America.(Cavagnaro, Charles) (Entered 10 MOTION for Protective Order by Sharp Manufacturing Company of America. (Cavagnaro, Charles) (Entered 11 AGREED PROTECTIVE ORDER. Signed by Judge J. Daniel Breen on (Breen, J.) (Entered 12 MOTION for Extension of Time to Complete Discovery and Continue Trial Date proposed order submitted by Sharp Manufacturing Company of America. (Cavagnaro, Charles) (Entered 13 ORDER, Motions terminated 12 MOTION for Extension of Time to Complete Discovery and Continue Trial Date proposed order submitted filed by Sharp Manufacturing Company of America. Jury Trial re-set for 09 30 AM in Courtroom 1 - Memphis before Judge J. Daniel Breen. Pretrial Conference re-set for 09 00 AM in Courtroom 1 - Memphis before Judge J. Daniel Breen. Proposed Joint Pretrial Order due Signed by Judge J. Daniel Breen on (tpe, ) (Entered 14 MOTION for Leave to File Excess Pages proposed order submitted by Sharp Manufacturing Company of America. (Attachments # 1 Memorandum in Support of SECTION DefendantSECTION's Motion for Leave to File Excess Pages# 2 Certificate of Consultation)(Cavagnaro, Charles) (Entered SECTION Case SECTION 2 As of 03 25 PM CDT 4 of 6 15 ORDER Granting 14 Unopposed Motion for Leave to File Excess Pages. Signed by Judge J. Daniel Breen on (Breen, J.) (Entered 16 MOTION for Summary Judgment by Sharp Manufacturing Company of America. (Attachments # 1 Memorandum in Support of SECTION DefendantSECTION's Motion for Summary Judgment# 2 Exhibit 1 - Deposition Excerpts of Delores Vaughn# 3 Exhibit 2 - Deposition Excerpts of Daniel Wilburn# 4 Exhibit 3 - Affidavit of T.C. Jones, Jr.# 5 Exhibit 4 - SECTION PlaintiffSECTION's Response to SECTION DefendantSECTION's First Set of Interrogatories# 6 Exhibit 5 - Deposition Excerpts of W. Lee Moffatt, M.D.# 7 Exhibit 6 - Deposition Excerpts of Arsen H. Manugian, M.D.# 8 Exhibit 7 - Affidavit of Daniel Wilburn# 9 Exhibit 8 - Deposition Excerpts of Karin Tanaka# 10 Exhibit 9 - Affidavit of Karin Tanaka# 11 Exhibit 10 - Deposition Excerpts of T.C. Jones, Jr.# 12 Johnson v. St. Clare Hosp. 1998 WL 13 Inaviuc v. Hauer 1998 WL 57077# 14 Fields v. St. Bernard 11 AD Cases 1845# 15 EEOC v. Sharp Docket No. Charles) (Entered 17 MOTION for Extension of Time to File Response/Reply as to 16 MOTION for Summary Judgment (proposed order submitted), MOTION for Leave to File Excess Pages (proposed order submitted) by Equal Employment Opportunity Commission. (Attachments # 1 Memorandum in Support of Unopposed Motion for Extension of Time to Respond to SECTION DefendantSECTION's Motion for Summary Judgment and for Enlargement of the Page Limitation# 2 Certificate of Consultation)(Smith, Deidre) (Entered 18 ORDER Granting 17 SECTION PlaintiffSECTION's Unopposed Motion for Extension of Time to Respond re 16 MOTION for Summary Judgment and Granting 17 Motion for Enlargement of the Page Limitation; Responses due by Signed by Judge J. Daniel Breen on (Breen, J.) (Entered 19 RESPONSE in Opposition re 16 MOTION for Summary Judgment filed by Equal Employment Opportunity Commission. (Attachments # 1 Memorandum in Support of Response to MSJ# 2 Exhibit No. 1 - Vaughn depo excerpts# 3 Exhibit No. 2 - Sullivan Depo excerpts# 4 Exhibit No. 3 - Rice depo excerpts# 5 Exhibit No. 4 - Tanaka depo excerpts# 6 Errata No. 5 - Jones depo excerpts# 7 Exhibit No. 6- Letter from Dr. Wright# 8 Exhibit No. 7 - Moffatt depo excerpts# 9 Exhibit No. 8 - Manugian depo excerpts# 10 Exhibit No. 9 - Vaughn Separation Notice# 11 Exhibit No. 10 - Declaration of Dr. Hicks# 12 Exhibit No. 11 - Sullivan EEOC Affidavit# 13 Exhibit No. 12 - Wilburn depo excerpts# 14 Exhibit No. 13 - Chalmers EEOC Affidavit# 15 Exhibit No. 14 - Employment List, page 1# 16 Exhibit No.15 - Charge of Discrimination# 17 Exhibit No. 16 - Rice EEOC Affidavit# 18 Exhibit Vaughn Performance Evaluation, Exh. 13 to Vaughn depo# 19 Exhibit Leave Request Form, Exh. 2 to Vaughn depo# 20 Exhibit Article 34.5 of CBA, Exh. 10 to Jones depo# 21 Exhibit Notes from Dr. Moffatt, Exh. 3 and 4 to Moffatt depo# 22 Exhibit Job Description Assembler F 2, Exh. 7 to Jones Depo# 23 Exhibit Job Description, Exh. 2 to Wilburn Depo# 24 Exhibit Ergonomic Policy, Exh. 2 to Jones Depo# 25 Exhibit Article 30.5 of the CBA, Exh. 6 to Jones Depo# 26 Exhibit Employee List of Hires, Exh. 8 to Tanaka Depo# 27 Exhibit Article 7.8 of the CBA, Exh. 9 to Jones# 28 Exhibit Unreported Case - Adams v. TRW Automotive# 29 Exhibit Appl. for SS Disability, Exh. 6 to Vaughn Depo# 30 Exhibit Unreported Case - Pipkin v. M-I, LLC# 31 Exhibit Stafne v. Unicare Homes, Inc.# 32 Exhibit Unreported Case - Stephenson v. United Airlines# 33 Exhibit EEOC's Response to SECTION DefendantSECTION's Interrogatories# 34 Response to SECTION DefendantSECTION's Statement of Undisputed Facts)(Smith, Deidre) (Entered 20 MOTION to Strike proposed order submitted by Sharp Manufacturing Company of America. (Attachments # 1 Memorandum in Support of SECTION DefendantSECTION's Motion to Strike)(Cavagnaro, Charles) (Entered 21 MOTION for Leave to File Reply Brief and Memorandum in Support proposed order submitted by Sharp Manufacturing Company of America. (Attachments # 1 Exhibit A - proposed Reply Brief)(Cavagnaro, Charles) (Entered 22 ORDER Granting 21 SECTION DefendantSECTION's Motion for Leave to File Reply. Signed by Judge J. Daniel Breen on (Breen, J.) (Entered 23 REPLY to Response to Motion re 16 MOTION for Summary Judgment filed by Sharp Manufacturing Company of America. (Attachments # 1 Exhibit B - Deposition of SECTION Case SECTION 2 As of 03 25 PM CDT 5 of 6 Nicole Sullivan)(Cavagnaro, Charles) (Entered 24 RESPONSE in Opposition re 20 MOTION to Strike proposed order submitted filed by Equal Employment Opportunity Commission. (Attachments # 1 Memorandum in Support of Response in Opposition of Motion to Strke, # 2 Exhibit No. 1 - Declaration of Investigator Timothy Williams, # 3 Exhibit (Collective) No. 2 - Unreported Case #1, # 4 Exhibit (Collective) No. 2 - Unreported Case Deidre) (Entered 25 ATTACHMENT Exhibit No. 3 - Affidavit and Certificate (inadvertently omitted from previous filing) to 24 Response in Opposition to Motion, by Equal Employment Opportunity Commission. (Smith, Deidre) (Entered 26 MOTION to Withdraw as Attorney (Proposed Order Submitted) by Equal Employment Opportunity Commission. (Smith, Deidre) (Entered 27 ORDER Granting 26 SECTION PlaintiffSECTION's Motion to Withdraw Counsel. Attorney Terry L. Beck terminated. Signed by Judge J. Daniel Breen on (Breen, J.) (Entered 28 NOTICE by Equal Employment Opportunity Commission SECTION PlaintiffSECTION's PreTria Disclosures Pursuant to Fed.R.Civ.P. (Smith, Deidre) (Entered 29 ORDER granting 20 Motion to Strike. Signed by Judge J. Daniel Breen on (Breen, J.) (Entered 30 NOTICE by Sharp Manufacturing Company of America of Rule Pre-Trial Disclosures (Cavagnaro, Charles) (Entered 31 NOTICE of Appearance by Steven W. Dills on behalf of Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (Dills, Steven) (Entered 32 RE-SETTING LETTER Pretrial Conference re-set for 09 30 AM in Courtroom 1 - Memphis before Judge J. Daniel Breen. (tpe, ) (Entered 33 ORDER granting in part and denying in part 16 Motion for Summary Judgment. Signed by Judge J. Daniel Breen on (Breen, J.) (Entered 34 MOTION in Limine to Exclude Disciplinary Actions (Proposed Order submitted) by Equal Employment Opportunity Commission. (Attachments # 1 Memorandum in Support, # 2 Exhibit No. 1- Vaughn depo excerpts, # 3 Exhibit No. 2 - Separation Notice, # 4 Exhibit No. 3 - Collective Exhibit, # 5 Exhibit No. 4 - Jones depo excerpts, # 6 Exhibit No. 5 - Unreported Case)(Smith, Deidre) (Entered 35 MOTION in Limine to Exclude Testimony of Green and Leoncavallo (Proposed Order submitted) by Equal Employment Opportunity Commission. (Attachments # 1 Memorandum in Support, # 2 Exhibit No.1 - Vaughn depo excerpts, # 3 Exhibit No. 2 - Separation Notice, # 4 Exhibit No. 3 - Jones depo excerpts, # 5 Exhibit No. 4 - Def's Rule 26a1 Disclosures, # 6 Exhibit No. 5 - Doctor's Notes)(Smith, Deidre) (Entered 36 MOTION in Limine to Exclude Previous Case (Proposed Order submitted) by Equal Employment Opportunity Commission. (Attachments # 1 Memorandum in Support, # 2 Exhibit No. Deidre) (Entered 37 MOTION in Limine to Exclude Evidence Related to SSA Records (Proposed Order submitted) by Equal Employment Opportunity Commission. (Attachments # 1 Memorandum in Support, # 2 Exhibit No. 1 - Collective Exhibit, # 3 Exhibit No. 2 - Separation Notice, # 4 Exhibit No. 3 - Vaughn depo excerpts)(Smith, Deidre) (Entered 38 MOTION in Limine to Exclude Evidence Related to Decision of TN Dept of Workforce (Proposed Order submitted) by Equal Employment Opportunity Commission. (Attachments # 1 Memorandum in Support)(Smith, Deidre) (Entered 39 MOTION in Limine to Exclude Testimony of Paul Shaffer (Proposed Order submitted) by Equal Employment Opportunity Commission. (Attachments # 1 Memorandum in Support)(Smith, Deidre) (Entered SECTION Case SECTION 2 As of 03 25 PM CDT 6 of 6 40 Joint MOTION to Continue Trial Date proposed orde submitted by Sharp Manufacturing Company of America. (Attachments # 1 Affidavit of Reginald Yurchik)(Cavagnaro, Charles) (Entered 41 ORDER Granting 40 Joint Motion to Continue Trial Date. Signed by Judge J. Daniel Breen on (Breen, J.) (Entered 42 ORDER REASSIGNING CASE. Case reassigned to Judge S. Thomas Anderson for all further proceedings. Judge J. Daniel Breen no longer assigned to case. Signed by Judge J. Daniel Breen on (jae, ) (Entered 43 SETTING LETTER Status Conference set for 01 30 PM in Courtroom 4 - Memphis before Judge S. Thomas Anderson. (tlh) (Entered 44 SETTING LETTER Status Conference RESET for 10 00 AM in Courtroom 4 - Memphis before Judge S. Thomas Anderson. (tlh) (Entered 45 Minute Entry for proceedings held before Judge S. Thomas Anderson Status Conference held on Parties provided Court with history and status of case; Mediation held - case did not settle; Parties to meet with mediator again; Parties open to Judicial Mediation; Matter set for trial Motions due by Pretrial Order due by Pretrial Conference set for 01 30 PM in Courtroom 4 - Memphis before Judge S. Thomas Anderson; Jury Trial set for 09 30 AM in Courtroom 4 - Memphis before Judge S. Thomas Anderson. (Plf Atty D. Smith; Dft Attys J. Crout, K. Bowling,III) (Court Reporter Mark 07-10 17) (tlh) (Entered 46 ORDER REFERRING MOTION 39 MOTION in Limine to Exclude Testimony of Paul Shaffer (Proposed Order submitted) filed by Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, 37 MOTION in Limine to Exclude Evidence Related to SSA Records (Proposed Order submitted) filed by Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, 38 MOTION in Limine to Exclude Evidence Related to Decision of TN Dept of Workforce (Proposed Order submitted) filed by Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, 35 MOTION in Limine to Exclude Testimony of Green and Leoncavallo (Proposed Order submitted) filed by Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, 34 MOTION in Limine to Exclude Disciplinary Actions (Proposed Order submitted) filed by Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, 36 MOTION in Limine to Exclude Previous Case (Proposed Order submitted) filed by Equal Employment Opportunity Commission. Signed by Judge S. Thomas Anderson on (Anderson, S.) (Entered 47 NOTICE of Settlement by Sharp Manufacturing Company of America (Crout, Joseph) (Entered 48 CONSENT DECREE DISMISSING CASE. Signed by Judge S. Thomas Anderson on (Anderson, S.) (Entered 49 JUDGMENT In accordance with the Consent Decree entered on this cause is hereby dismissed. Signed by Judge S. Thomas Anderson on (Anderson, S.) (Entered Summary: In 2006, the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) brought this suit against Sharp Manufacturing Company in the U.S. District for the Western District of Tennessee. The complaint alleged that Sharp violated the Americans with Disabilities Act by failing to provide the complainant with reasonable accommodation and discharged her because of her disability. The EEOC sought injunctive and monetary relief as well as punitive damages against the defendant. In 2009, the court approved the parties’ consent decree. This decree had a duration of one year and instructed the defendant to refrain from unlawful employment discrimination and retaliation; report to the EEOC on compliance with Title VII; revise its policies on reasonable accommodations; post notices of this agreement in their offices; pay to the plaintiff. The case is closed.

In 2006, the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) brought this suit against Sharp Manufacturing Company in the U.S. District for the Western District of Tennessee. The complaint alleged that Sharp violated the Americans with Disabilities Act by failing to provide the complainant with reasonable accommodation and discharged her because of her disability. The EEOC sought injunctive and monetary relief as well as punitive damages against the defendant. In 2009, the court approved the parties’ consent decree. This decree had a duration of one year and instructed the defendant to refrain from unlawful employment discrimination and retaliation; report to the EEOC on compliance with Title VII; revise its policies on reasonable accommodations; post notices of this agreement in their offices; pay to the plaintiff. The case is closed.

Using the provided source, generate a concise summary: SECTION EEOC LITIGATION SETTLEMENT REPORT - October 2005 http EEOC v. DTG Operations, Inc., d/b/a Dollar Rent A Car No. (S.D. Fla. Oct. 7, 2005) The Miami District Office alleged that defendant, a nationwide rental car company, subjected charging party, a counter agent at its Ft. Lauderdale International Airport facility, to a sexually hostile work environment and discharged her in retaliation for opposing sexual harassment. The conduct, by charging party's male supervisor, involved offensive sexual comments and intrusive physical acts occurring regularly for over 6 months. Charging party rebuffed the harasser, who then intensified the harassing conduct. Charging party complained to management, which failed to take corrective action, and the harasser then began to fabricate performance deficiencies. After an altercation that caused charging party again to insist that management address the harassment, defendant sent charging party home and then terminated her 10 days later, claiming attendance and performance problems and insubordination. Charging party, who intervened in EEOC's suit, will receive in monetary relief under the 3-year consent decree resolving this case. 1 of 1 9 46 AM Summary: On June 30, 2004, the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) filed this Title VII sex discrimination and retaliation suit in the Fort Lauderdale U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Florida against DTG Operations, Inc., (doing business as Dollar Rent A Car) on behalf of a female employee. The employee intevened in the case. The parties entered a consent decree that provided for monetary relief and injunctive relief, such as antidiscrimination, antiretaliation, training, and notice-posting provisions. The case is now closed.

On June 30, 2004, the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) filed this Title VII sex discrimination and retaliation suit in the Fort Lauderdale U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Florida against DTG Operations, Inc., (doing business as Dollar Rent A Car) on behalf of a female employee. The employee intevened in the case. The parties entered a consent decree that provided for monetary relief and injunctive relief, such as antidiscrimination, antiretaliation, training, and notice-posting provisions. The case is now closed.

Using the provided source, generate a concise summary: SECTION U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission PRESS RELEASE Bright Petroleum Inc. Sued by EEOC for Retaliation Food Market Terminated Manager Who Filed Discrimination Charge, Federal Agency Charges INDIANAPOLIS - Bright Petroleum Inc. d/b/a The Bright Market violated federal law by retaliating against a manager who filed and refused to drop a discrimination charge with the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC), the agency charged in a lawsuit it filed yesterday. The Bright Market is a food market and gas station located in Lawrenceburg, Ind. According to the EEOC's lawsuit, The Bright Market retaliated against Deli Manager Michelle Bunte by singling her out for heightened scrutiny after learning that she had filed an EEOC charge and would not drop her charge. The company then disciplined and terminated her. Taking adverse actions against an employee who complains of discrimination, files an EEOC charge or otherwise exercises her rights under Title VII violates the retaliation provision of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. The prohibition against retaliation applies regardless of the outcome of the underlying charge. The EEOC asserts that the company's actions were intentional and demonstrated a reckless indifference to the worker's federally protected rights. The EEOC filed suit (Case No. 4 in U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Indiana, New Albany Division, after first attempting to reach a pre-litigation settlement through its conciliation process. The agency is seeking back wages plus interest and compensatory and punitive damages, as well as other relief, including a permanent injunction to prevent the company from engaging in any future retaliation. Employers are simply not entitled to punish employees -- or former employees -- for complaining about discrimination said Laurie A. Young, regional attorney for the EEOC's Indianapolis District Office. If they try to do so, they are only making a bad situation worse for themselves. The EEOC enforces federal laws prohibiting employment discrimination. Further information about the EEOC is available on the agency's web site at www.eeoc.gov. Summary: In December 2013, the EEOC brought this suit against Bright Petroleum for scrutinizing, disciplining and discharging against its female employee who filed a charge of sex discrimination with the EEOC. The EEOC and Bright Petroleum entered a three-year consent decree on December 12, 2014.

In December 2013, the EEOC brought this suit against Bright Petroleum for scrutinizing, disciplining and discharging against its female employee who filed a charge of sex discrimination with the EEOC. The EEOC and Bright Petroleum entered a three-year consent decree on December 12, 2014.

Using the provided source, generate a concise summary: SECTION U.S. District Court North Carolina Middle District (NCMD) CIVIL DOCKET FOR CASE # 1 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA v. THE UNIVERSITY OF NORTH CAROLINA Assigned to JUDGE THOMAS D. SCHROEDER Referred to MAG/JUDGE WALLACE W. DIXON Cause 42 2000 Job Discrimination (Sex) SECTION PlaintiffSECTION Date Filed Date Terminated Jury Demand Both Nature of Suit 442 Civil Rights Jobs Jurisdiction U.S. Government SECTION PlaintiffSECTION UNITED STATES OF AMERICA represented by ELAINE J. GRANT DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE - CIVIL RIGHTS 950 PENNSYLVANIA AVE., NW, PHB 4910 WASHINGTON, DC 20530 Fax Email [email protected] LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED SARAH C. BLUTTER DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE - CIVIL RIGHTS 950 PENNSYLVANIA AVE., NW, PHB 4017 WASHINGTON, DC 20530 Fax Email [email protected] ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED V. Intervenor SECTION PlaintiffSECTION TASHA MURRAY Intervenor SECTION PlaintiffSECTION MATTIE SMITH represented by DAVID B. PURYEAR, JR. PURYEAR AND LINGLE, P.L.L.C. 5501-E ADAMS FARM LN. ADAMS FARM PROFESSION CTR. GREENSBORO, NC 27407 Fax Email [email protected] LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED represented by DAVID B. PURYEAR, JR. (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED V. SECTION DefendantSECTION THE UNIVERSITY OF NORTH CAROLINA represented by THOMAS J. ZIKO N. C. DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE Date Filed POB 629 RALEIGH, NC 27602 Fax Email [email protected] LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED JOHN P. SCHERER, II N. C. DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE POB 629 RALEIGH, NC Fax Email [email protected] ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED # Docket Text 1 COMPLAINT UNITED STATES OF AMERICA against THE UNIVERSITY OF NORTH CAROLINA, filed by UNITED STATES OF AMERICA.(GRANT, ELAINE) (Entered 2 CIVIL COVER SHEET, filed by UNITED STATES OF AMERICA.(GRANT, ELAINE). Modified on replaced corrected cover sheet and added attachment (Garrett, Kim). (Entered CASE REFERRED to Standing Order 30 (McClain, Abby) (Entered 3 NOTICE of Appearance by attorney SARAH C. BLUTTER on behalf of SECTION PlaintiffSECTION UNITED STATES OF AMERICA (BLUTTER, SARAH) (Entered 4 Summons Issued as to THE UNIVERSITY OF NORTH CAROLINA. (McClain, Abby) (Entered 5 Notice of Right to Consent. Counsel shall serve the attached form on all parties. (McClain, Abby) (Entered 6 REQUEST FOR WAIVER of Service sent to Thomas J. Ziko on August 14, 2007 by UNITED STATES OF AMERICA.Waiver of Service due by (BLUTTER, SARAH) (Entered 7 WAIVER OF SERVICE Returned Executed by UNITED STATES OF AMERICA. THE UNIVERSITY OF NORTH CAROLINA waiver sent on answer due (BLUTTER, SARAH) (Entered 8 MOTION to Intervene by Tasha Murray, Mattie Smith. Responses due by (Attachments # 1 Appendix Complaint of Intervenor-SECTION PlaintiffSECTION Tasha Murray# 2 Appendix Complaint of Intervenor-SECTION PlaintiffSECTION Mattie Smith# 3 Text of Proposed Order)(PURYEAR, DAVID) (Entered 9 Brief Of Applicant Intervenor-SECTION PlaintiffSECTION s In Support of Motion To Intervene BRIEF re 8 MOTION to Intervene. (PURYEAR, DAVID) (Entered 10 AFFIDAVIT of Tasha Murray filed by Intervenor SECTION PlaintiffSECTION Tasha Murray. (PURYEAR, DAVID) (Entered 11 AFFIDAVIT of Mattie Smith re 8 MOTION to Intervene filed by Intervenor SECTION PlaintiffSECTION Mattie Smith. (PURYEAR, DAVID) (Entered 12 NOTICE of Appearance by attorney DAVID B. PURYEAR, JR on behalf of Intervenor SECTION PlaintiffSECTION s Tasha Murray, Mattie Smith (PURYEAR, DAVID) (Entered 13 NOTICE of Appearance by attorney THOMAS J. ZIKO on behalf of SECTION DefendantSECTION THE UNIVERSITY OF NORTH CAROLINA (ZIKO, THOMAS) (Entered SECTION Case SECTION 1 document<docnum> filed <datefiled> 2 of 4 ***Motions Referred 8 MOTION to Intervene to Judge WALLACE W. DIXON - (McCarty, Dianne) (Entered 14 NOTICE of Appearance by attorney JOHN P. SCHERER, II on behalf of SECTION DefendantSECTION THE UNIVERSITY OF NORTH CAROLINA (SCHERER, JOHN) (Entered ORDER granting 8 Motion to Intervene. The attorneys for the SECTION PlaintiffSECTION -Intervenors are DIRECTED to file and serve the Intervenors' complaints as the rules require. Signed by Judge WALLACE W. DIXON on (DIXON, WALLACE) (Entered 15 Intervenor COMPLAINT, filed by Tasha Murray.(PURYEAR, DAVID) (Entered 16 Intervenor COMPLAINT, filed by Mattie Smith.(PURYEAR, DAVID) (Entered 17 Summons Issued as to THE UNIVERSITY OF NORTH CAROLINA. (Attachments # 1 Additional summons)(McClain, Abby) (Entered 18 AFFIDAVIT OF SERVICE by Affidavit of Service of Process by Certified Mail as to THE UNIVERSITY OF NORTH CAROLINA served on answer due (Attachments # 1 Exhibit Summons# 2 Exhibit Service Transmittal Letter# 3 Exhibit Certified Mail Return Receipt)(PURYEAR, DAVID) (Entered 19 Notice to Parties RE SO30. Responses due by (McCarty, Dianne) (Entered 20 ANSWER to Complaint with Jury Demand by THE UNIVERSITY OF NORTH CAROLINA. (SCHERER, JOHN) (Entered 21 ANSWER to Intervenor Complaint of Intervenor-SECTION PlaintiffSECTION Tasha Murray by THE UNIVERSITY OF NORTH CAROLINA. (SCHERER, JOHN) (Entered 22 ANSWER to Intervenor Complaint of Intervenor-SECTION PlaintiffSECTION Mattie Smith by THE UNIVERSITY OF NORTH CAROLINA. (SCHERER, JOHN) (Entered Case Reassigned to Judge JAMES A. BEATY, JR. Judge UNASSIGNED no longer assigned to the case. (Powell, Gloria) (Entered 23 NOTICE of Initial Pretrial Conference Hearing Initial Pretrial Conference Hearing set for 09 30 AM in Durham Courtroom #1 before MAG/JUDGE WALLACE W. DIXON. (Williamson, Wanda) (Entered 24 Rule 26(f) Report (Joint) filed by all parties by UNITED STATES OF AMERICA.(BLUTTER, SARAH) (Entered 25 MOTION to Consolidate Cases. Case to be consolidated with 1 by TASHA MURRAY, MATTIE SMITH. Responses due by (PURYEAR, DAVID) (Entered 26 BRIEF re 25 MOTION to Consolidate Cases. Case to be consolidated with 1 (Attachments # 1 Supplement Brief In Support Of Unopposed Motion To Consolidate, No. 1 DAVID) (Entered ***Motions Referred 24 Rule 26(f) Report (Joint) filed by all parties to MAG/JUDGE WALLACE W. DIXON. (Williamson, Wanda) (Entered ORDER approving 24 RULE 26F REPORT (JOINT). Signed by MAG/JUDGE WALLACE W. DIXON on All discovery, including general and expert, shall be completed by August 29, 2008. SECTION PlaintiffSECTION can request leave to join additional parties or amend pleadings until March 1, 2008. SECTION DefendantSECTION can request leave to join additional parties or amend pleadings until April 1, 2008. Case-management track is established as complex. Mediator shall be Jonathan R. SECTION Case SECTION 1 document<docnum> filed <datefiled> 3 of 4 Harkavy. Trial of this case is expected to take approximately 4-5 days. A jury trial has been demanded. (DIXON, WALLACE) Modified on to supplement text (Law, Trina). (Entered Set Scheduling Order Deadlines Amended Pleadings by SECTION PlaintiffSECTION due by Amended Pleadings by SECTION DefendantSECTION due by Joinder of Parties by SECTION PlaintiffSECTION due by Joinder of Parties by SECTION DefendantSECTION due by Discovery due by (Law, Trina) (Entered ***Motions Referred 25 MOTION to Consolidate Cases. Case to be consolidated with 1 to MAG/JUDGE WALLACE W. DIXON. (Williamson, Wanda) (Entered 27 ORDER signed by MAG/JUDGE WALLACE W. DIXON on granting 25 Motion to Consolidate Cases, that the motions of Tasha Murray, Mattie Smith and Gloria Adams Smoot to consolidate these actions, for purposes of pretrial discovery and motion proceedings, and mediation, shall be and HEREBY IS GRANTED. For ease of administration of these cases, all filings henceforth must contain the double caption as on this order with case number being the lead case, and all filings in the two cases will be maintained by the clerk in case number (Law, Trina) (Entered 28 Joint MOTION for Protective Order by UNITED STATES OF AMERICA. Responses due by (Attachments # 1 Stipulated Protective Order)(BLUTTER, SARAH) (Entered ***Motions Referred 28 Joint MOTION for Protective Order to MAG/JUDGE WALLACE W. DIXON. (Kemp, Donita) (Entered 29 STIPULATED PROTECTIVE ORDER Re confidential information as set out; Signed by MAG/JUDGE WALLACE W. DIXON on (Law, Trina) (Entered Case Reassigned to JUDGE TOM SCHROEDER. CHIEF JUDGE JAMES A. BEATY, JR. no longer assigned to the case. (Powell, Gloria) (Entered CASE REFERRED to Mediation pursuant to Local Rule 83.9b of the Rules of Practice and Procedure of this Court. (Gammon, Cheryl) (Entered MEDIATION SCHEDULING ORDER; Mediation due by (Gammon, Cheryl) (Entered 30 ORDER Appointing JONATHAN R. HARKAVY as the mediator pursuant to LR Signed by John S. Brubaker, Clerk of Court. (Gammon, Cheryl) (Entered 31 NOTICE of Hearing Jury Trial set for 09 30 AM in Unassigned Courtroom. Trial brief due (McCarty, Dianne) (Entered 32 Joint MOTION for Entry of Consent Decree by UNITED STATES OF AMERICA. Responses due by (Attachments # 1 Consent Decree Between the United States and the University of North Carolina, # 2 Order of Approval)(GRANT, ELAINE) (Entered ***Motions Submitted 32 Joint MOTION for Entry of Consent Decree to JUDGE THOMAS D. SCHROEDER- (Powell, Gloria) (Entered Case Reported Settled Prior to Mediation (Gammon, Cheryl) (Entered NOTICE of Docket Text/Event Modification on the previous docket entry re Stipulation of Dismissal due was inadvertently docketed and has been removed from the docket. (Gammon, Cheryl) (Entered 33 CONSENT DECREE BETWEEN THE UNITED STATES AND THE UNIVERSITY OF NORTH CAROLINA signed by JUDGE THOMAS D. SCHROEDER on as set out; (Law, Trina) (Entered 34 STIPULATION of Dismissal of University of North Carolina by TASHA MURRAY, MATTIE SMITH. (PURYEAR, DAVID) (Entered SECTION Case SECTION 1 document<docnum> filed <datefiled> 4 of 4 Summary: On August 7, 2007, the U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) filed a lawsuit under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 against the University of North Carolina in the U.S. District Court for the Middle District of North Carolina. The DOJ, alleging that the defendant discriminated against two female employees by subjecting them to sexual harassment. On April 28, 2008, the Court (Judge Thomas D. Schroeder) entered a consent decree. The contained injunctions on gender discrimination and retaliation, and orders to modify harassment complaints procedure, and to provide anti-discrimination training. Individuals received monetary damages of total.

On August 7, 2007, the U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) filed a lawsuit under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 against the University of North Carolina in the U.S. District Court for the Middle District of North Carolina. The DOJ, alleging that the defendant discriminated against two female employees by subjecting them to sexual harassment. On April 28, 2008, the Court (Judge Thomas D. Schroeder) entered a consent decree. The contained injunctions on gender discrimination and retaliation, and orders to modify harassment complaints procedure, and to provide anti-discrimination training. Individuals received monetary damages of total.

Using the provided source, generate a concise summary: SECTION SECTION Case SECTION 1 As of 10 40 AM CDT 1 of 6 PROTO, SCHENKIER, TERMED United States District Court Northern District of Illinois - CM/ECF LIVE, Ver 3.2.3 (Chicago) CIVIL DOCKET FOR CASE # 1 Espana, et al v. MW Wire Specialties Assigned to Hon. Sidney I. Schenkier Demand $0 Cause 42 2000e Job Discrimination (Employment) SECTION PlaintiffSECTION Date Filed Date Terminated Jury Demand Both Nature of Suit 442 Civil Rights Jobs Jurisdiction Federal Question Zaida Espana represented by Uche O. Asonye Asonye and Associates 39 S. LaSalle St. Suite 815 Chicago, IL 60603 (312) Email [email protected] LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED SECTION PlaintiffSECTION Vitalia Mero represented by Uche O. Asonye (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED SECTION PlaintiffSECTION Virginia Munoz on behalf of themselves and all others similarly situated represented by Uche O. Asonye (See above for address) ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED V. SECTION DefendantSECTION Midwest Wire Specialties, Inc. represented by Donna S. Colley Berens &Tate 10050 Regency Circle Suite 400 Omaha, NE 68114 (402) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED Jane Farwell Anderson Anderson &Moore, P.C. 111 West Washington Street Suite 1100 Chicago, IL 60602 (312) TERMINATED ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED Julia A. Martin Matkoy, Salzman, Madoff &Gunn 55 East Monroe Street Suite 2900 Chicago, IL 60603 (312) SECTION Case SECTION 1 As of 10 40 AM CDT 2 of 6 Michael W. Duffee Ford &Harrison 55 East Monroe Street Suite 2900 Chicago, IL (312) Email [email protected] ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED Thomas Stephen Moore Anderson &Moore, P.C. 111 West Washington Street Suite 1100 Chicago, IL 60602 (312) TERMINATED Date Filed # Docket Text 1 COMPLAINT (Exhibits) jury demand - Civil cover sheet - Appearance(s) of Uche O. Asonye as attorney(s) for all plaintiffs (No summons(es) issued.) (Documents 1-1 through 1-3) (hp) (Entered RECEIPT regarding payment of filing fee paid; on in the amount of receipt (hp) (Entered SCHEDULE set on by Hon. Rebecca R. Pallmeyer Status hearing set before Judge Pallmeyer for 9 00 on courtrom 2119. Mailed notice (etv) (Entered 2 APPLICATION for leave to appear pro hac vice by Donna S. Colley for defendant; Order entered granting leave by Hon. Rebecca R. Pallmeyer. (yp) (Entered 3 ATTORNEY APPEARANCE for defendant by Donna S. Colley, Jane Farwell Anderson and Thomas Stephen Moore (jmp) (Entered 4 ANSWER by defendant and afirmative defenses to plaintiffs' complaint 1-1 ; Notice. (mw) (Entered SCHEDULE set on by Hon. Rebecca R. Pallmeyer Status hearing set for stricken. The parties are directed to appear through lead counsel for a pretrial conference pursuant to Fed.R.Civ.P. 16 set for 9 00 on Counsel are requested promptly to meet face-to-face for a discussion of possible settlement and for preparation of a planning report in the form that is enclosed. The form is accessible from the court's Internet site. Such report shall be submitted to Judge Pallmeyer in chambers no later than two business days prior to the conference. Mailed notice (etv) (Entered SCHEDULE set on by Hon. Rebecca R. Pallmeyer Status hearing set for 9 00 on Discovery ordered closed on Reports from retained experts under Rule due from SECTION PlaintiffSECTION s by from SECTION DefendantSECTION by SECTION PlaintiffSECTION s allowed until 6/8/01 to join additional parties and to amend pleadings. SECTION DefendantSECTION allowed until 8/7/01 to join additional parties and to amend pleadings. Dispositive motions due Rule 16 conference held. Mailed notice (etv) (Entered SCHEDULE set on by Hon. Rebecca R. Pallmeyer Status hearing held and continued to 9 00 on Mailed notice (etv) (Entered 5 MOTION by plaintiffs to extend time to join additional parties and amend pleadings and other deadlines ; Notice (ar) (Entered 6 MINUTE ORDER of 6/5/01 by Hon. Rebecca R. Pallmeyer Plantiffs'motion to extend time to join additional parties and amend pleadings 5-1 5-2, granted. SECTION PlaintiffSECTION s' time to join additional parties and to amend pleadings extended to SECTION DefendantSECTION's time to join additional parties and to amend pleadings extended to SECTION Case SECTION 1 As of 10 40 AM CDT 3 of 6 Discovery deadline extended to Status hearing set for at 9 00 am to stand. Notice mailed by Judge's staff (ar) Modified on (Entered 7 MOTION by plaintiff to compel directed at defendant, Midwest Wire Specialties, Inc. (Attachments); Notice (vmj) (Entered 8 AMENDED notice of motion by plaintiffs regarding motion to compel directed at defendant, Midwest Wire Specialties, Inc. 7-1. (vmj) (Entered 9 MINUTE ORDER of by Hon. Rebecca R. Pallmeyer SECTION PlaintiffSECTION s' motion to compel directed at defendant, Midwest Wire Specialties, Inc. is withdrawn 7-1. No notice (vmj) (Entered SCHEDULE set on by Hon. Rebecca R. Pallmeyer Status hearing held and continued to 9 00 on SECTION PlaintiffSECTION's time to add parties and amend pleadings extended to Dispositive motions date extended to Mailed notice (etv) (Entered 10 MOTION by defendant for protective order ; Notice (jmp) (Entered 11 MINUTE ORDER of 8/8/01 by Hon. Rebecca R. Pallmeyer Motion for protective order withdrawn 10-1. No notice (jmp) (Entered 12 MINUTE ORDER of by Hon. Rebecca R. Pallmeyer Entered Stipulation Protective Order Telephoned notice (yap) Modified on (Entered 14 MOTION by plaintiffs for leave to amend their complaint Memorandum in Support ; Notices (yap) (Entered 15 MOTION by plaintiffs to set a briefing schedule for motion for class certification ; Notice (yap) (Entered 16 INDEX OF EXHIBITS by plaintiffs to their motion for leave to amend their complaint 14-1 (yap) (Entered 18 FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT (proposed) 1-1 by plaintiff; jury demand (yap) (Entered 13 AMENDED memorandum by plaintiff in support of their motion for leave to amend their complaint (Attachments) (las) (Entered 17 MINUTE ORDER of by Hon. Rebecca R. Pallmeyer Status hearing re-set to at 9 00 a.m. Motion for leave to amend their complaint 14-1 is granted. Motion to set a briefing schedule for motion for class certification 15-1 is granted. Motion for class certification to be filed by or on response to be filed by or on reply to be filed by or on Status of 9/6/01 stricken. Mailed notice (yap) (Entered 19 FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT - class action by plaintiffs; jury demand (Attachments) (jmp) (Entered 20 ANSWER by defendant MW Wire Specialties and affirmative defenses to plaintiffs' first amended complaint 19-1 ; Notice of filing (eav) (Entered 21 MOTION by plaintiffs to extend discovery cut-off to complete certain limited discovery (Attachments); Notice. (maf) (Entered 22 MINUTE ORDER of by Hon. Rebecca R. Pallmeyer Status hearing re-set for at 9 00 a.m. SECTION PlaintiffSECTION s' motion to extend discovery cut-off to complete certain limited discovery is granted 21-1. Discovery extended to. Status hearing set for is stricken. Mailed notice (maf) (Entered 23 MOTION by defendant for continuance up to and including in which to file dispositive motions and to provide expert disclosures ; (cdy) (Entered 24 MINUTE ORDER of by Hon. Rebecca R. Pallmeyer Motion for continuance is granted 23-1. SECTION DefendantSECTION has to and including in which to file their dispositive motions and to provide expert disclosures. Mailed notice (maf) SECTION Case SECTION 1 As of 10 40 AM CDT 4 of 6 (Entered 25 MOTION by defendant to hold in abeyance and suspend all deadlines (Attachments). (mw) (Entered 26 AMENDED NOTICE by defendant of hearing regarding its motion to hold in abeyance and suspend all deadlines 25-1. (mw) (Entered 27 MINUTE ORDER of by Hon. Rebecca R. Pallmeyer Status hearing held and continued to at 9 00 a.m. SECTION DefendantSECTION's motion to hold in abeyance and suspend all deadlines 25-1 is granted as stated in Court. New dates for briefing of class certification motion. Motion by response by reply by Motion subject to further status report concerning discovery responses. Mailed notice by judge's staff (mw) (Entered SCHEDULE set on by Hon. Rebecca R. Pallmeyer Status hearing set for is reset to 9 00 on Mailed notice (etv) (Entered SCHEDULE set on by Hon. Rebecca R. Pallmeyer Status hearing reset to 9 00 on Mailed notice (etv) (Entered SCHEDULE set on by Hon. Rebecca R. Pallmeyer Status hearing held and continued to 9 00 on No notice (etv) (Entered SCHEDULE set on by Hon. Rebecca R. Pallmeyer Status hearing held and continued to 9 00 on Deposition of Ms. Colley to be taken no later than Mailed notice (etv) (Entered 28 ATTORNEY APPEARANCE for defendant by Michael W. Duffee, Julia A. Martin (ntf) (Entered 29 MOTION by defendant to substitute counsel ; Notices. (vmj) Modified on (Entered 30 MOTION by defendant to extend tiime to produce attorney Donna S. Colley for deposition. (vmj) (Entered 31 MINUTE ORDER of by Hon. Rebecca R. Pallmeyer Status hearing held and continued to 4/2/02 at 9 00 a.m. Motion to substitute counsel is granted 29-1. Thomas Stephen Moore and Jane Anderson of Anderson &Moore granted leave to withdraw. Motion to extend time to produce attorney Donna S. Colley for deposition is granted 30-1. All previously noticed discovery to be completed by Class certification motion to be filed by Mailed notice (vmj) (Entered 32 ATTORNEY APPEARANCE for defendant by Michael W. Duffee, Julia A. Martin; Notice. (vmj) (Entered 33 AGREDD MOTION by plaintiffs to extend time to file motion for class certification ; Notice. (cem) (Entered 34 MINUTE ORDER of by Hon. Rebecca R. Pallmeyer SECTION PlaintiffSECTION's agreed motion to extend time to file motion for class certification granted to and including 33-1. Status hearing set for at 9 00 a.m. Mailed notice (cem) (Entered 36 MOTION by defendant to refer case to magistrate judge ; Notice. (lc) (Entered 35 EXPEDITED REFERRAL ORDER Case referred to Hon. Sidney I. Schenkier for settlement conference. Mailed notice. (etv) (Entered 37 MINUTE ORDER of 4/5/02 by Hon. Rebecca R. Pallmeyer SECTION DefendantSECTION's motion to refer case to magistrate judge is granted 36-1. Case referred to Magistrate Judge Schenkier for settlement conference. Mailed notice (lc) (Entered SCHEDULE set on by Hon. Sidney I. Schenkier Settlement conference set for 1 30 p.m. on in chambers 1756. The settlement conference will be conducted in accordance with the Court's Standing Order on Instructions for Settlement Conference, which is enclosed. The schedule for exchange of demand and SECTION Case SECTION 1 As of 10 40 AM CDT 5 of 6 offer is as follows plaintiff's counsel shall serve on defense counsel a written settlement demand by SECTION DefendantSECTION's counsel shall serve on plaintiff's counsel a written settlement offer by SECTION PlaintiffSECTION's counsel shall deliver copies of these letters to chambers by noon on Parties with ultimate settlement authority to be present. Mailed &Telephoned notice (fce) (Entered 38 MINUTE ORDER of 5/9/02 by Hon. Sidney I. Schenkier Settlement conference held. Settlement agreement reached between the parties, subject to preliminary and final approval of class settlement. The matter is set for a status conference on at 9 00 a.m. Mailed notice by judge's staff (mw) (Entered SCHEDULE set on by Hon. Rebecca R. Pallmeyer Status hearing reset to 9 00 on Mailed notice (etv) (Entered 39 AGREED MOTION by plaintiffs to extend time to file motion for class certification ; Notice (rmm) (Entered SCHEDULE set on by Hon. Sidney I. Schenkier Status hearing held and continued to 9 00 a.m. on Mailed notice (fce) (Entered 40 AMENDED NOTICE by plaintiff of motion to extend time to file motion for class certification 39-1 (rmm) (Entered SCHEDULE set on 6/4/02 by Hon. Sidney I. Schenkier Status hearing held and continued to 9 00 a.m. on Mailed notice (fce) (Entered 41 MINUTE ORDER of 6/4/02 by Hon. Rebecca R. Pallmeyer Status hearing held. Filed plaintiffs' agreed motion to extend time to file for class certification 39-1. Motion granted for 120 days, or until Motion deadline Mailed notice (rmm) (Entered 42 LIMITED CONSENT to exercise of jurisdiction by a United States Magistrate Judge signed by Zaida Espana, Vitalia Mero, MW Wire Specialties (emd) (Entered 44 MOTION by plaintiff for leave to file second amended class action complaint ; Notice. (hmb) (Entered 43 REASSIGNMENT ORDER of This case is reassigned to the Hon. Sidney I. Schenkier from Hon. Rebecca R. Pallmeyer pursuant to Local Rule 73.1. (For further detail see order.) Mailed notice (emd) (Entered 45 MINUTE ORDER of by Hon. Sidney I. Schenkier SECTION PlaintiffSECTION's unopposed motion for leave to file second amended class action complaint is granted 44-1. Status hearing held and continued to at 9 00 a.m. Notices mailed by Judge's staff (hmb) (Entered 46 SECOND AMENDED COMPLAINT-CLASS ACTION 19-1 by plaintiff; jury demand; adding Virginia Munoz (Attachments). (hmb) (Entered SCHEDULE set on by Hon. Sidney I. Schenkier Status hearing held and continued to 11 30 a.m. on Motion for preliminary approval is set for hearing on at 11 30 a.m. Mailed notice (fce) (Entered SCHEDULE set on by Hon. Sidney I. Schenkier Status hearing reset to 8 30 a.m. on Telephoned notice (fce) (Entered 47 JOINT MOTION by parties to conditionally certify settlement classes, and preliminarily approve proposed settlement ; Memorandum in support; Notice (ntf) (Entered 48 CLASS ACTION SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT by parties (Attachments). (ntf) (Entered 50 MINUTE ORDER of 8/1/02 by Hon. Sidney I. Schenkier Status hearing held. Preliminary approval of settlement agreement as modified by the Court is granted. Notice mailed by judge's staff (ntf) (Entered SECTION Case SECTION 1 As of 10 40 AM CDT 6 of 6 49 MINUTE ORDER of 8/2/02 by Hon. Sidney I. Schenkier (Enterd Order of Conditional Certification of Settlement Classes, Preliminary Approval of Settlement Agreement, and Amendment of Complaint). Fairness hearing set for 9 30am Notice mailed by judge's staff (ntf) (Entered 51 NOTICE by plaintiffs of class action and proposed settlement. (ntf) (Entered 52 MINUTE ORDER of 8/2/02 by Hon. Sidney I. Schenkier The court approves the Notice of Class Action and Proposed Settlement in line with the court's comments made in open court on Notice mailed by judge's staff notice (ntf) (Entered SCHEDULE set on by Hon. Sidney I. Schenkier In court hearing held. Mailed notice (fce) (Entered 53 MINUTE ORDER of by Hon. Sidney I. Schenkier Enter judgment and order of dismissal. This case is dismissed pursuant to settlement terminating case. (Entered Final Judgment and Order of Dismissal). Notice mailed by judge's staff (ntf) (Entered 54 TRANSCRIPT of proceedings for the following date(s) Before Honorable Sidney Schenkier (54-1 through 54-2). (ntf) (Entered Summary: In 2001, four former employees of Mid-West Wire Specialties, Inc. filed this class action complaint in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Illinois. The plaintiffs alleged that the defendant discriminated against them on the basis of their sex, female, in violation of Title VII, in that they were sexually harassed by other employees of the defendant and faced retaliation for resisting the sexual advances. In 2002, the parties reached a settlement that awarded monetary damages and backpay for for class members. The case closed in August 2002.

In 2001, four former employees of Mid-West Wire Specialties, Inc. filed this class action complaint in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Illinois. The plaintiffs alleged that the defendant discriminated against them on the basis of their sex, female, in violation of Title VII, in that they were sexually harassed by other employees of the defendant and faced retaliation for resisting the sexual advances. In 2002, the parties reached a settlement that awarded monetary damages and backpay for for class members. The case closed in August 2002.

Using the provided source, generate a concise summary: SECTION ADR, CLOSED, R16, TRCK2 U.S. District Court Eastern District of Missouri (LIVE) (St. Louis) CIVIL DOCKET FOR CASE # 4 Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, et al. v. Bodega Bars USA, LLC d/b/a Mosaic Restaurant Assigned to Honorable Donald J. Stohr Cause 42 2000e Job Discrimination (Employment) SECTION PlaintiffSECTION Date Filed Date Terminated Jury Demand SECTION PlaintiffSECTION Nature of Suit 442 Civil Rights Jobs Jurisdiction U.S. Government SECTION PlaintiffSECTION Equal Employment Opportunity Commission represented by Barbara A. Seely EEOC 1222 Spruce Street Room 8.100 St. Louis, MO 63103 Fax Email [email protected] LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED C. Felix Miller, Jr. EEOC 1222 Spruce Street Room 8.100 St. Louis, MO 63103 Fax Email [email protected] LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED V. Intervenor SECTION PlaintiffSECTION Aimee Boss represented by C. Felix Miller, Jr. (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED Donna L. Harper SEDEY HARPER, P.C. 2711 Clifton Avenue St. Louis, MO 63139 Fax Email [email protected] LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED John D. Lynn SEDEY HARPER, P.C. 2711 Clifton Avenue St. Louis, MO 63139 Fax Email [email protected] LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED Intervenor SECTION PlaintiffSECTION Morgan Hagedon V. SECTION DefendantSECTION Bodega Bars USA, LLC d/b/a Mosaic Restaurant Mary Anne O. Sedey SEDEY HARPER, P.C. 2711 Clifton Avenue St. Louis, MO 63139 Fax Email [email protected] LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED represented by C. Felix Miller, Jr. (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED Donna L. Harper (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED John D. Lynn (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED Mary Anne O. Sedey (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED represented by Burton D. Garland, Jr. OGLETREE AND DEAKINS 7700 Bonhomme Avenue Suite 650 St. Louis, MO 63105 Fax Email [email protected] LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED C. Felix Miller, Jr. (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED William M. Lawson LOWENBAUM PARTNERSHIP, L.L.C. 222 S. Central Avenue Suite 901 St. Louis, MO 63105 Fax Email [email protected] LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED Robert W. Stewart LOWENBAUM PARTNERSHIP, L.L.C. Date Filed 222 S. Central Avenue Suite 901 St. Louis, MO 63105 Fax Email [email protected] ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED # Docket Text 1 COMPLAINT against defendant Bodega Bars USA, LLC d/b/a Mosaic Restaurant Non-Jury Demand, filed by Equal Employment Opportunity Commission. (Attachments # 1 Civil Cover Sheet # 2 Original Filing Form # 3 Waiver of Service # 4 Disclosure Of Corporation Interests Certificate)(Miller, C.) (Entered Case Opening Notification Waivers issued 1, Disclosure of Corporate Interest issued to defendant. Judge Assigned Charles A. Shaw. (SAJ, ) (Entered 2 SUMMONS Returned Executed filed by Equal Employment Opportunity Commission. Bodega Bars USA, LLC d/b/a Mosaic Restaurant served on answer due (Miller, C.) Modified on (MRC, ). This document entered into the record incorrectly. Attorney notified of filing error. Attorney to refile this document appropriately. (Entered 3 WAIVER OF SERVICE Returned Executed filed by Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (Miller, C.) (Entered WAIVER OF SERVICE Returned Executed See Document #3 Bodega Bars USA, LLC d/b/a Mosaic Restaurant waiver sent on answer due Entry made for answer due deadline. NO.PDF ATTACHED (MRC, ) (Entered 4 ENTRY of Appearance by Robert W. Stewart for SECTION DefendantSECTION Bodega Bars USA, LLC d/b/a Mosaic Restaurant. (Stewart, Robert) (Entered 5 ENTRY of Appearance by William M. Lawson for SECTION DefendantSECTION Bodega Bars USA, LLC d/b/a Mosaic Restaurant. (Lawson, William) (Entered 6 ENTRY of Appearance by Burton D. Garland, Jr for SECTION DefendantSECTION Bodega Bars USA, LLC d/b/a Mosaic Restaurant. (Garland, Burton) (Entered 7 ANSWER to 1 Complaint, by Bodega Bars USA, LLC d/b/a Mosaic Restaurant.(Garland, Burton) (Entered 8 DISCLOSURE OF CORPORATION INTERESTS CERTIFICATE by SECTION DefendantSECTION Bodega Bars USA, LLC d/b/a Mosaic RestaurantParent companies N/A, Subsidiaries N/A, Publicly held company N/A,. (Garland, Burton) (Entered 9 MOTION for Leave to Intervene. (Attachments # 1 Exhibit Complaint)(Lynn, John) (Entered 10 MEMORANDUM in Support of Motion re 9 MOTION for Leave to Intervene filed by SECTION PlaintiffSECTION s Aimee Boss, Morgan Hagedon. (Lynn, John) (Entered 11 MEMORANDUM AND ORDER -.......IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that movants Aimee Boss and Morgan Hageon's motion to intervene is GRANTED and they are joined as parties plainitff in this case. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the Clerk of the Court shall amend the caption of this case to read as follows Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, plaintiff, and Aimee Boss and Morgan Hagedon, intervenor plaintiffs, v. Bodega Bars USA, LLC, d/b/a/ Mosaic Restaurant, defendant,No. 4 CAS. The parties shall use this caption on all future pleadings. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the Clerk of the Court shall detach and docket the intervenor plaintiffs' complaint, which was submitted as an attachment to the motion for leave. re 9 MOTION for Leave to Intervene filed by SECTION PlaintiffSECTION Morgan Hagedon, SECTION PlaintiffSECTION Aimee Boss. Signed by Honorable Charles A. Shaw on (MRC) (Entered 12 INTERVENOR COMPLAINT Summons(es) issued-none, Waivers issued none, Jury Demand, filed by Aimee Boss, Morgan Hagedon.(MRC) (Entered 13 RULE 16 ORDER (see Order for complete details)- A Scheduling Conference pursuant to Fed.R.Civ.P. 16 is set for Friday, January 4, 2008 at 9 30 am in Courtroom later than fifteen (15) days before the scheduling conference, counsel shall file a joint proposed scheduling plan with the Court....This case has been preliminarily assigned to Track Two (2) Joint Scheduling Plan due by Rule 16 Conference set for 09 30 AM in Courtroom 12N before Honorable Charles A. Shaw.. Signed by Honorable Charles A. Shaw on (MRC) (Entered 14 ENTRY of Appearance by Barbara A. Seely for SECTION PlaintiffSECTION Equal Employment Opportunity Commission. (Seely, Barbara) (Entered 15 SECTION DefendantSECTION's ANSWER to Complaint (SECTION PlaintiffSECTION -Intervenors') by Bodega Bars USA, LLC d/b/a Mosaic Restaurant.(Lawson, William) (Entered 16 JOINT SCHEDULING PLAN by SECTION PlaintiffSECTION Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, Intervenor SECTION PlaintiffSECTION s Aimee Boss, Morgan Hagedon, SECTION DefendantSECTION Bodega Bars USA, LLC d/b/a Mosaic Restaurant.. (Miller, C.) (Entered 17 ENTRY of Appearance by Mary Anne O. Sedey for Intervenor SECTION PlaintiffSECTION s Aimee Boss, Morgan Hagedon. (Sedey, Mary Anne) (Entered 18 ENTRY of Appearance by Donna L. Harper for Intervenor SECTION PlaintiffSECTION s Aimee Boss, Morgan Hagedon. (Harper, Donna) (Entered 19 CASE MANAGEMENT ORDER This case is assigned to Track ADR Future Reference Motion to Join Parties due by Discovery Completion due by Dispositive Motions due by Pretrial Compliance due by Motion in Limine due by Pretrial Conference set for 02 00 PM in Courtroom 12N before Honorable Charles A. Shaw. Jury Trial set for 09 00 AM in Courtroom 12N before Honorable Charles A. Shaw. Signed by Honorable Charles A. Shaw on (NCL) Modified Pretrial Compliance Date on (NCL). (Entered 20 Minute Entry for proceedings held before Honorable Charles A. Shaw Rule 16 Conference held on Conference by phone? No. CMO to issue. ( EEOC or Intervenor SECTION PlaintiffSECTION's NOT REPRESENTED BY COUNSEL) (Court Reporter or FTR Gold Operator initials none present.) (FTR Gold yes or no no.) (JWJ) Modified on (JWJ). (Entered 21 ORDER REFERRING CASE to Alternative Dispute Resolution. This case is referred to Mediation Designation of Lead Counsel Mr. C. Felix Miller, Jr Designation of Neutral due by ADR Completion Deadline due by Signed by Honorable Charles A. Shaw on (JWJ) (Entered 22 Joint MOTION for Extension of Time to Complete Mediation by SECTION PlaintiffSECTION Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, Intervenor SECTION PlaintiffSECTION s Aimee Boss, Morgan Hagedon, SECTION DefendantSECTION Bodega Bars USA, LLC d/b/a Mosaic Restaurant. (Miller, C.) (Entered Docket Text ORDER re Doc. 22, Joint MOTION for Extension of Time to Complete Mediation by SECTION PlaintiffSECTION Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, Intervenor SECTION PlaintiffSECTION s Aimee Boss, Morgan Hagedon, and SECTION DefendantSECTION Bodega Bars USA, LLC d/b/a Mosaic Restaurant; ORDERED GRANTED. The parties shall complete mediation by June 16, 2008. Signed by Honorable Charles A. Shaw on March 24, 2008. (SMH) (Entered 23 Designation of Neutral by parties and ADR Conference Report by SECTION PlaintiffSECTION Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, Intervenor SECTION PlaintiffSECTION s Aimee Boss, Morgan Hagedon, SECTION DefendantSECTION Bodega Bars USA, LLC d/b/a Mosaic Restaurant Neutral John Gianoulakis Date of Conference May 28, 2008 time 9 00 a.m. Location U.S. Courthouse(Miller, C.) (Entered 24 NOTICE of Appointment of Neutral Neutral name John Gianoulakis Neutral selected by Parties(LMT) (Entered 25 ORDER - Upon review of the Court file, the undersigned concludes there are circumstances present in this case which might give rise to the need for recusal pursuant to 28 USC 455. Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that this case is transmitted to the Clerk of the Court for random reassignment.. Signed by Honorable Charles A. Shaw on (MRC) (Entered 26 REASSIGNMENT ORDER (James G. Woodward,Clerk of Court). -......IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the above styled cause is randomly reassigned to United States District Judge Donald J. Stohr for all further proceedings. Judge Honorable Charles A. Shaw termed. Case reassigned to Judge Honorable Donald J. Stohr for all further proceedings (MRC) (Entered 27 ORDER - IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the pretrial conference previously scheduled for March 12, 2009 at 2 00 p.m. is vacated to be reset upon further order of Court. Signed by Honorable Donald J. Stohr on (JMW) (Entered 28 Joint MOTION for Extension of Time to Complete Mediation by SECTION PlaintiffSECTION Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, Intervenor SECTION PlaintiffSECTION s Aimee Boss, Morgan Hagedon, SECTION DefendantSECTION Bodega Bars USA, LLC d/b/a Mosaic Restaurant. (Miller, C.) (Entered 29 ORDER IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the parties' joint motion for extension of time to complete alternative dispute resolution Doc. #28 is granted as follows. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the March 16, 2009 trial setting is vacated and all pending motions are denied without prejudice. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that counsel shall file, no later than July 1, 2008, a stipulation for dismissal, a motion for leave to voluntarily dismiss, or a proposed consent judgment. Failure to comply timely with this order may result in the dismissal of this action with prejudice. Re 28 Joint MOTION for Extension of Time to Complete Mediation filed by Morgan Hagedon, Aimee Boss, Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, Bodega Bars USA, LLC d/b/a Mosaic Restaurant - Granted. (Response to Court due by Signed by Honorable Donald J. Stohr on (NCL) (Entered 30 ADR COMPLIANCE REPORT by Neutral John Gianoulakis Date of Conference participated in good faith Y, the parties DID achieve a settlement(JWJ) (Entered 31 Joint MOTION to Approve Consent Judgment by SECTION PlaintiffSECTION Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, Intervenor SECTION PlaintiffSECTION s Aimee Boss, Morgan Hagedon, SECTION DefendantSECTION Bodega Bars USA, LLC d/b/a Mosaic Restaurant. (Miller, C.) (Entered 32 Consent Decree by SECTION PlaintiffSECTION Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, Intervenor SECTION PlaintiffSECTION s Aimee Boss, Morgan Hagedon, SECTION DefendantSECTION Bodega Bars USA, LLC d/b/a Mosaic Restaurant. (Miller, C.) (Entered Docket Text ORDER re 31 Joint MOTION to Approve Consent Judgment, GRANTED. Signed by Honorable Donald J. Stohr on (LCE) (Entered 33 CONSENT DECREE (See document for complete details). Signed by Honorable Donald J. Stohr on (Attachments # 1 Exhibit A, # 2 Exhibit B)(JMW) (Entered Summary: On September 21, 2007, the EEOC filed a claim in the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Missouri under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and Title I of the Civil Rights Act of 1991 on behalf of two aggrieved female employees. The EEOC alleged that Defendant, Bodega Bars, engaged in unlawful employment practices on the basis of sex. In 2008, the parties entered into a consent decree that required the Defendant to not engage in sex discrimination or sexual harassment of employees, establish a sexual harassment policy and training program for employees, as well as pay monetary damages to the two aggrieved employees. The case is presumed closed.

On September 21, 2007, the EEOC filed a claim in the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Missouri under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and Title I of the Civil Rights Act of 1991 on behalf of two aggrieved female employees. The EEOC alleged that Defendant, Bodega Bars, engaged in unlawful employment practices on the basis of sex. In 2008, the parties entered into a consent decree that required the Defendant to not engage in sex discrimination or sexual harassment of employees, establish a sexual harassment policy and training program for employees, as well as pay monetary damages to the two aggrieved employees. The case is presumed closed.

Using the provided source, generate a concise summary: SECTION Northern District of Ohio U.S. District Court Northern District of Ohio (Cleveland) CIVIL DOCKET FOR CASE # 1 Equal Employment Opportunity Commission v. Pitt-Ohio Express, Date Filed Inc. Date Terminated Assigned to Judge Lesley Wells Jury Demand SECTION PlaintiffSECTION Cause 28 451 Employment Discrimination Nature of Suit 442 Civil Rights Jobs Jurisdiction U.S. Government SECTION PlaintiffSECTION SECTION PlaintiffSECTION Equal Employment Opportunity Commission represented by C. Larry Watson U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission - Cleveland 3001 AJC Federal Bldg. 1240 East Ninth Street Cleveland, OH 44199 Fax Email [email protected] (Inactive) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED Lawrence Mays Ste. 1300 55 Public Square Cleveland, OH 44113 Fax Email [email protected] LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED Debra M. Lawrence U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission - Baltimore 3rd Floor 10 South Howard Street Baltimore, MD 21201 Fax Email [email protected] ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED https Jeffrey A. Stern U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission - Cleveland 3001 AJC Federal Bldg. 1240 East Ninth Street Cleveland, OH 44199 1/10 SECTION PlaintiffSECTION /Intervenor Ms. Pamela J. Moher Northern District of Ohio Fax Email [email protected] ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED Ronald L. Phillips Equal Employment Opportunity Commission 3rd Floor 10 South Howard Street Baltimore, DC 21201 Fax Email [email protected] ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED represented by Bruce B. Elfvin Elfvin, Klingshirn, Royer & Torch Ste. 530 4700 Rockside Road Independence, OH 44131 Fax Email [email protected] LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED Barbara Kaye Besser Elfvin & Besser 4070 Mayfield Road Cleveland, OH 44121 Fax Email [email protected] ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED David B. Malik Law Office of David B. Malik 8437 Mayfield Road Chesterland, OH 44026 Fax Email ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED Dennis J. Niermann P.O. Box 202295 Shaker Heights, OH 44120 Email [email protected] ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED https 2/10 V. SECTION DefendantSECTION Pitt-Ohio Express, Inc. TERMINATED Northern District of Ohio represented by Bobbi Britton Tucker Buchanan Ingersoll & Rooney 20th Floor One Oxford Centre Pittsburgh, PA Fax Email [email protected] LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED Terrence H. Murphy Buchanan Ingersoll & Rooney 20h Floor One Oxford Centre 301 Grant Street Pittsburgh, PA 15219 Fax Email [email protected] LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED Jaime S. Tuite Buchanan, Ingersoll & Rooney - Pittsburgh 20th Floor One Oxford Centre 301 Grant Street Pittsburgh, PA 15219 Fax Email [email protected] ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED Thomas H. Barnard, Jr. Ogletree Deakins Nash Smoak & Stewart Cleveland Ste. 4100 127 Public Square Cleveland, OH 44114 Fax Email [email protected] ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED Date Filed # Docket Text 1 Complaint against Pitt-Ohio Express, Inc. Nothing issued. Filed by Equal Employment Opportunity Commission. (Attachments # 1 Civil Cover Sheet)(C, BA) (Entered https 3/10 Northern District of Ohio 2 Random Assignment of Magistrate Judge McHargh (C, BA) (Entered 3 Attorney Appearance of Jeffrey Stern and Ron Phillips filed by Lawrence Mays on behalf of Equal Employment Opportunity Commission. (Mays, Lawrence) Modified text of docket entry on (B, B). (Entered 4 Motion for appearance pro hac vice of Debra M. Lawrence filed by attorney Lawrence Mays on behalf of Equal Employment Opportunity Commission. (C, K A) (Entered 5 Motion to intervene as a party SECTION PlaintiffSECTION filed by Pamela J. Moher. (Attachments # 1 Proposed Complaint in Intervention)(Elfvin, Bruce) (Entered 6 Attorney Appearance filed by Dennis J. Niermann on behalf of Pamela J. Moher. (Niermann, Dennis) Modified text of docket entry on (B, B). (Entered 7 Notice of Service of motin to intervene and complaint in intervention filed by Pamela J. Moher. Related document(s) 5. (Besser, Barbara) Modified text of docket entry on (B, B). (Entered Order Non Document Granting SECTION PlaintiffSECTION's Motion for appearance pro hac vice; Attorney Debra M. Lawrence is added as counsel for Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (Related Doc # 4 )(Entered on behalf of Judge Lesley Wells on L) Modified text on (C, B). (Entered 8 Answer to Complaint (Related Doc # 1 ) filed by Pitt-Ohio Express, Inc.. (Barnard, Jr., Thomas) (Entered 9 Corporate Disclosure Statement filed by all defendants. Related document(s) 8. (Barnard, Jr., Thomas) (Entered 10 Opposition to Motion to intervene as a party SECTION PlaintiffSECTION filed by all defendants. Related document(s) 5. (Barnard, Jr., Thomas) No certificate of service, attorney notified. Modified text on (C, B). (Entered 11 Certificate of Service to opposition to motion filed by defendant. Related document(s) 10. (Barnard, Jr., Thomas) Modified wording of text on (C, B). (Entered 12 Reply to response to Motion to intervene as a party filed by Pamela J. Moher. Related document(s) 5. (Elfvin, Bruce) Modified text (C, K A). (Entered 13 Attorney Appearance by David B. Malik filed by on behalf of Pamela J. Moher. (Malik, David) (Entered Financial Transaction in the amount of received for motion to appear pro hac vice by attorney Bobbi Britton Tucker, Receipt # (C, BA) (Entered 14 Motion for attorney Bobbi Britton Tucker to Appear Pro Hac Vice filed by Pitt-Ohio Express, Inc. Filing fee paid; receipt number (C, K A) (Entered Order Non Document Granting Motion for appearance pro hac vice; attorney Bobbi Britton Tucker is added as counsel for Pitt-Ohio Express, Inc. (Related Doc # 14 )(Entered on behalf of Judge Lesley Wells on L) (Entered 15 Order Granting Party Intervention Pursuant to Rule (Related Doc # 5 )(Signed by Judge Lesley Wells on L) (Entered https 4/10 Northern District of Ohio 16 Intervenor's complaint, with jury demand, against SECTION DefendantSECTION on behalf of SECTION PlaintiffSECTION Intervenor and the Class. Filed by Pamela J. Moher. (Elfvin, Bruce) Modified wording of text on (C, B). (Entered 17 Attorney Appearance by Terrence H. Murphy filed by on behalf of Pitt-Ohio Express, Inc.. (Murphy, Terrence) (Entered 18 Answer to Intervenor Complaint (Related Doc # 16 ) filed by Pitt-Ohio Express, Inc.. (Tucker, Bobbi) (Entered 19 Report of Parties' Planning Meeting under Federal Civil Procedures 26(f) and Local Rules filed by Equal Employment Opportunity Commission. (Stern, Jeffrey) Modified text on (E, P). (Entered 20 Case Management Conference Scheduling Order. A case management conference to be held on at 10 00 AM at Chambers 328 before Hon. Lesley Wells.( Signed by Judge Lesley Wells on (C, L) (Entered 21 Motion (Letter) to reschedule the Case Management Conference Scheduled for at 10 00 a.m. a half hour earlier at 9 30 a.m. filed by Pitt-Ohio Express, Inc. Related document(s) 20. (M, P) (Entered 22 Case Management Conference Plan/Order Status Conference set for 10 00 AM to be held telephonically before. Amendment of pleadings due 90 days after the Court's order on class certification. Fact Discovery cutoff is Class certification motions shall be filed by 7/9/07 with brief in opposition filed by 8/9/07 and reply brief due Court will conduct a status conference 30 days from the court's class certification order. Signed by Judge Lesley Wells on (M, P) (Entered Notice of Re-scheduled Hearing. The telephonic status conference set for has been cancelled. A Telephone Conference has been re-set for at 09 00 AM before Hon. Lesley Wells. (C,LS) (Entered Financial Transaction in the amount of received for motion to appear pro hac vice by attorney Jaime S. Tuite, Receipt # (K, K) (Entered 23 Motion for attorney Jaime S. Tuite to Appear Pro Hac Vice, filed by Pitt-Ohio Express, Inc.. Filing fee paid; receipt number (Attachments # 1 Affidavit of Jaime S. Tuite# 2 Certificate of Good Standing# 3 Proposed Order) (B,B) Modified on (B, T). (Entered Order Non Document Granting Motion for appearance pro hac vice. Attorney Jaime S. Tuite is added as counsel for Pitt-Ohio Express, Inc. (Related Doc # 23 )(Entered on behalf of Judge Lesley Wells on (Entered 24 Proposed Stipulation Regarding Discovery filed by Pitt-Ohio Express, Inc.. (Tucker, Bobbi) (Entered 25 Proposed Stipulation Regarding Discovery filed by Pitt-Ohio Express, Inc.. (Tucker, Bobbi) (Entered 26 Proposed Stipulation extending response time for Discovery filed by Pamela J. Moher. (Elfvin, Bruce) Modified wording of text on (C, Br). (Entered Order (Non Document). Discovery stipulation is moot. (Related Doc. # re 24 ) (Entered on behalf of Judge Lesley Wells on (Entered Order (Non Document) Granting Discovery Stipulation. (Related Doc. # 25 ). The parties have stipulated that Pitt Ohio shall have through 19 March 2007, to respond to SECTION PlaintiffSECTION's First Interrogatories and SECTION PlaintiffSECTION's First Request for Production and that EEOC shall have https 5/10 Northern District of Ohio through 6 April to respond to SECTION DefendantSECTION's First Request for Production of Documents to SECTION PlaintiffSECTION and SECTION DefendantSECTION's First Set of Interrogatories to SECTION PlaintiffSECTION.(Entered on behalf of Judge Lesley Wells on (Entered 27 Unopposed Motion for extension of time until (Multiple Dates) to Extend Discovery filed by Pitt-Ohio Express, Inc.. (Tuite, Jaime) (Entered Order non-document granting 27 Motion for Extension of Time re 27 Unopposed Motion for extension of time (Multiple Dates) to Extend Discovery Phase I Fact Discovery Cutoff is 19 July 2007; Class Certification Motions due 20 August 2007; Responsive Briefs in Opposition due 20 September 2007; Reply Briefs due 5 October 2007.. Signed by Judge Lesley Wells on 6 April (Entered Minutes of proceedings non-document.Status Conference held on 6 April 2007 before Judge Lesley Wells. Parties' counsel discussed the pre-trial discovery schedule with the Court. Present for the conversation were Jeffrey Stern, Barbara Kaye Besser, Dennis Niermann, and Terrence Murphy. The next Status Conference will be held with the Court on 5 June 2007 at 10 AM. The Court will initiate the call. (D,JA) (Entered 28 Stipulated Motion for extension of Current Scheduling Order until filed by all parties. (Elfvin, Bruce) (Entered Order Non Document Granting Stipulated Motion for Extension of Current Scheduling Order. (Related Doc. #28). (Entered on behalf of Judge Lesley Wells on (Entered 29 Joint Letter re Mediation Report filed by Equal Employment Opportunity Commission. (Stern, Jeffrey) (Entered 30 FILING ERROR- wrong version uploaded-filer will refile correct-Stipulated Motion for to Vacate Current Scheduling Order and Status Report filed by Pamela J. Moher. (Elfvin, Bruce) Modified text on (R, Sh). (Entered 31 Stipulated Motion for to Vacate Current Scheduling Order and Status Report filed by Pamela J. Moher. (Elfvin, Bruce) (Entered Order non-document granting Stipulated Motion to Vacate Current Scheduling Order and Status Report(Related Doc # 31 ). Consequent to a successful mediation of this matter the prior schedule is vacated. Instead, the parties shall, jointly or separately, submit an interim status report no later than 30 September 2007. The parties shall file their Joint Motion for Preliminary Approval by 31 October 2007. A Court-initiated telephonic status conference shall be held on Thursday 15 November 2007 at 10 00 A.M. Signed by Judge Lesley Wells on 5 September (Entered 32 Joint Status Report filed by all parties. (Elfvin, Bruce) (Entered 33 Address Change Notice by Thomas H. Barnard, Jr. filed by on behalf of Pitt-Ohio Express, Inc.. (Barnard, Jr., Thomas) (Entered Minutes of proceedings non-document.Telephonic Status Conference held on initiated from the chambers of Judge Lesley Wells. Counsel Bruce Elfvin, Jeffrey Stern, and Terrence Murphy discussed the processing, among the parties, of the proposed consent Decree, settlement agreements and Motion for Preliminary Approval. Counsel pledged to return the Motion for Preliminary Approval to the Court by the end of the calendar year. The Court set a Telephonic Status Conference with counsel for Monday, 17 December 2007 at 10 00. The Court will initiate the call. (D,JA) (Entered Notice of Hearing Non Document. A Telephonic Status Conference is set for at 02 00 PM before Judge Lesley Wells. (Court will initiate the conference call) (C,LS) https 6/10 (Entered Northern District of Ohio Minutes of proceedings non-document.Telephonic Status Conference held on initiated from the chambers of Judge Lesley Wells. Counsel Bruce Elfvin, Dennis Niermann, David Malik, Jeffrey Stern, and Terrence Murphy discussed progress toward a Consent Decree and Settlement Agreement and will meet in Cleveland on 25 January 2008 at 9 30 a.m., and again on 31 January 2008 at 9 30 a.m. to work toward finalizing the proposed documents. (D,JA) (Entered 34 Motion for conference/hearing by Class and Intervenor filed by SECTION PlaintiffSECTION /Intervenor Pamela J. Moher. (Attachments # 1 Appendix Mediation Summary Sheet)(Elfvin, Bruce) (Entered 35 Response to 34 Motion for conference/hearing by Class and Intervenor filed by Equal Employment Opportunity Commission. (Stern, Jeffrey) (Entered Minutes of proceedings non-document A Telephonic Status Conference was held on with EEOC counsel Jeff Stern and SECTION PlaintiffSECTION -Intervenor counsel Bruce Elfvin to address Mr. Elfvin's Motion filed on 25 June 2008 (Doc. 34) and Mr. Stern's brief in response, filed 7 July 2008 (Doc. 35). Counsel are in the process of addressing their differences involving the mediated settlement and will make themselves available on 10 July 2008 at 2 00 p.m. for a further telephonic conference on the prevailing issue. (D,JA) (Entered Minutes of proceedings non-document A Telephonic Status Conference was held on with EEOC counsel Jeff Stern and SECTION PlaintiffSECTION -Intervenor counsel Bruce Elfvin regarding the progress of the mediated settlement in this matter. The SECTION PlaintiffSECTION -Intervenor's proposal is under review. Counsel will be available for a further telephonic status conference on the prevailing issue on 24 July 2008 at 2 00 p.m. The Court will initiate the call. (D,JA) (Entered Minutes of proceedings non-document A Telephonic Status Conference was held on with EEOC counsel Jeff Stern and SECTION PlaintiffSECTION -Intervenor counsel Bruce Elfvin regarding the progress of the mediated settlement in this matter. The SECTION PlaintiffSECTION -Intervenor's proposal is under review. Counsel will be available for a further telephonic status conference on the prevailing issue on 31 July 2008 at 1 30 p.m. The Court will initiate the call. (D,JA) (Entered 36 Order referring case to Magistrate Judge Kenneth S. McHargh for the purpose of a settlement hearing to be held on 8/8/08 at 10 00 a.m. re 34 Motion for conference/hearing by Class and Intervenor filed by Pamela J. Moher. Judge Lesley Wells on (E,P) (Entered Minutes of proceedings non-document before Magistrate Judge Kenneth S. McHargh. A Settlement Conference was held on Case has not settled. Parties are to notify the Court by of their approval of the structure of the proposed settlement agreement. Time 4 hours. (Court Reporter None.) (R,N) (Entered 37 Letter filed by Equal Employment Opportunity Commission. (Stern, Jeffrey) (Entered 38 Notice of Hearing. A Telephonic Status Conference is set for at 10 00 AM before Magistrate Judge Kenneth S. McHargh. SECTION PlaintiffSECTION shall initiate the call and then contact the Court at (R,N) (Entered Minutes of proceedings non-document before Magistrate Judge Kenneth S. McHargh. A Telephonic Status Conference was held on In attendance were Attorney Jeffrey Stern for the plaintiff; Attorneys Barbara Besser and Dennis Niermann for the https 7/10 Northern District of Ohio SECTION PlaintiffSECTION /Intervenor and Attorney Terrence Murphy for the defendant. The parties continued discussions regarding outstanding settlement issues. A Telephonic Status Conference is set for at 2 30 PM before Magistrate Judge Kenneth S. McHargh. SECTION PlaintiffSECTION is to initiate the call and then contact the Court at Time 55 minutes (Court Reporter None.) (R,N) (Entered 39 Motion to enforce Settlement Agreement and for Statutory Interest filed by SECTION PlaintiffSECTION /Intervenor Pamela J. Moher. (Elfvin, Bruce) (Entered Minutes of proceedings non-document before Magistrate Judge Kenneth S. McHargh. A Telephonic Status Conference was held on In attendance were Attorney Jeffrey Stern for the plaintiff; Attorneys Bruce Elfvin and Dennis Niermann for the SECTION PlaintiffSECTION /Intervenor and Attorney Terrence Murphy for the defendant. The parties continued discussions regarding outstanding settlement issues. A Telephonic Status Conference is set for at 10 30 AM in before Magistrate Judge Kenneth S. McHargh. SECTION PlaintiffSECTION is to initiate the call and then contact the Court at Time 40 minutes (Court Reporter None.) (R,N) (Entered Minutes of proceedings before Magistrate Judge Kenneth S. McHargh. A Telephonic Status Conference was held on In attendance were Attorney Jeffrey Stern for the plaintiff; Attorneys Bruce Elfvin and Dennis Niermann for the SECTION PlaintiffSECTION /Intervenor and Attorney Terrence Murphy for the defendant. The parties continued discussions regarding outstanding settlement issues. A Telephone Status Conference is set for at 2 30 PM before Magistrate Judge Kenneth S. McHargh. SECTION PlaintiffSECTION is to initiate the call and then contact the Court at Time 20 minutes (Court Reporter None.) (R,N) (Entered Minutes of proceedings non-document before Magistrate Judge Kenneth S. McHargh. A Telephonic Status Conference was held on In attendance were Attorney Jeffrey Stern for the plaintiff; Attorneys Bruce Elfvin, Dennis Niermann and David B. Malik for the SECTION PlaintiffSECTION /Intervenor and Attorney Terrence Murphy for the defendant. The parties continued discussions regarding outstanding settlement issues. The parties jointly agreed to an extention of time to respond to the Motion to enforce the settlement agreement and for statutory interest 39. The Court agreed and has given the parties 10 days to respond. Counsel to contact the Court next Tuesday, September 30th, should any unexpected problems arrise with the final draft. Time 20 minutes (Court Reporter None.) (R,N) (Entered 40 Motion for Order QSF Approval with Settlement filed by SECTION PlaintiffSECTION /Intervenor Pamela J. Moher. (Attachments # 1 Exhibit Signed Settlement Agreement)(Elfvin, Bruce) (Entered 41 Order re 40 regarding Motion for Order QSF Approval with Settlement filed by Pamela J. Moher. This court approves and orders the designation of and establishment fo the Elfvin & Besser Co. LPA IOLTA account as a qualified settlement fund(QSF) and the appointment of Mr. Bruce B. Elfvin, as administator of that account as QFS. It is ordered that the Elfvin & Besser Co. LPA IOLTA is and be deemed a trust under Ohio law and that its assets be be segregated from the assests of the transferor, Pitt Ohio. Judge Lesley Wells on (E,P) (Entered 42 Notice of Withdrawal of Motion of SECTION PlaintiffSECTION -Intervenor to Enforce Settlement Agreement and For Statutory Interest filed by Pamela J. Moher. Related document(s) 39.(Elfvin, Bruce) (Entered 43 Notice of Dismissal of Claims with Prejudice filed by Pamela J. Moher. (Elfvin, Bruce) (Entered https 8/10 Northern District of Ohio 44 Order of partial dismissal. Matter is dismissed with prejudice as to Pitt-Ohio pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 41, each party shall bear its own costs. Signed by Judge Lesley Wells on (Related doc 43 )(B,B) (Entered 45 Joint Motion for Preliminary Approval of Consent Decree filed by SECTION PlaintiffSECTION Equal Employment Opportunity Commission. (Attachments # 1 Exhibit 1 Proposed Consent Decree, # 2 Exhibit 2 Proposed Preliminary Approval Order)(Stern, Jeffrey) (Entered 46 Proposed Order Revised Exhibit 2 Preliminary Approval Order filed by Equal Employment Opportunity Commission. Related document(s) 45. (Stern, Jeffrey) (Entered 47 Order Granting re 45 Joint Motion for Preliminary Approval of Consent Decree filed by Equal Employment Opportunity Commission with hearing to be held on at 10 00 AM at Courtroom 328, United States Courthouse, 201 Superior Ave. N.E., Cleveland, Ohio. Judge Lesley Wells on (E,P) (Entered 48 Consent Decree. Judge Lesley Wells on (E,P) (Entered 49 Brief Pre-Fairness Hearing Memorandum in Support of Final Approval of Consent Decree filed by Equal Employment Opportunity Commission. Related document(s) 47. (Attachments # 1 Affidavit Anderson Declaration) (Stern, Jeffrey) (Entered Minutes of proceedings non-document before Judge Lesley Wells.Fairness Hearing held on at 10 00 a.m. to review finalization of the parties' Consent Decree between EEOC and Pitt-Ohio Express, LLC. Jeffrey Stern present representing EEOC; Terrence Murphy present representing Pitt-Ohio Express, LLC. No objections were entered to the proposed Consent Decree and the parties' counsel submitted a proposed Order for the Court's approval.Related document(s) 45. (D,JA) (Entered 50 Order that the Final Approval of the Consent Decree is hereby Approved re 48 Order. Judge Lesley Wells on (E,P) (Entered 51 Motion for Disclosure of formula used to determine amounts awarded to offer-eligible claimants filed by SECTION PlaintiffSECTION /Intervenor Pamela J. Moher. Related document(s) 48. (Elfvin, Bruce) Modified text on (B,B). (Entered 52 Opposition to 51 Motion for Disclosure of formula used to determine amounts awarded to offer-eligible claimants filed by Equal Employment Opportunity Commission. (Attachments # 1 Declaration of Jeffrey Stern)(Stern, Jeffrey) Modified text on (B,B). (Entered 53 Reply to response to 51 Motion for Disclosure of formula used to determine amounts awarded to offer-eligible claimants filed by Pamela J. Moher. (Elfvin, Bruce) (Entered 54 Declaration hand-signed duplicate filed by Equal Employment Opportunity Commission. Related document(s) 52. (Stern, Jeffrey) Modified text on (B,B). (Entered 55 Supplemental Response to 51 Motion for Disclosure of formula used to determine amounts awarded to offer-eligible claimants filed by Pamela J. Moher. (Elfvin, Bruce) Modified text on (B,B). (Entered 56 Order denying Ms. Moher's Petition as premature and submitting the dispute to mediation (Related Doc # 51 ).Signed by Judge Lesley Wells on (Entered 57 Letter Report re Mediation filed by Equal Employment Opportunity Commission. Related https 9/10 Northern District of Ohio document(s) 56. (Stern, Jeffrey) (Entered 58 Letter Regarding Mediation filed by Pamela J. Moher. Related document(s) 57. (Elfvin, Bruce) (Entered 59 Order that upon review, the Court directs the parties to split evenly the cost of mediating this matter re 58 Letter filed by Pamela J. Moher, 57 Letter filed by Equal Employment Opportunity Commission.. Judge Lesley Wells on (E,P) (Entered 60 Renewed Motion for disclosure filed by SECTION PlaintiffSECTION /Intervenor Pamela J. Moher. Related document(s) 51. (Elfvin, Bruce) Modified text on (B,B). (Entered 61 Opposition to 60 Supplemental Motion for disclosure filed by Equal Employment Opportunity Commission. (Stern, Jeffrey) (Entered 62 Reply to response to 60 Renewed Motion for disclosure filed by Pamela J. Moher. (Elfvin, Bruce) Modified text on (B,B). (Entered 63 Order denying Ms. Moher's motion for disclosure. Judge Lesley Wells on (Related doc 51, 60 ) (K,V) Modified text and links on (B,B). (Entered PACER Service Center Transaction Receipt 15 41 08 PACER Login hs0328 0 Client Code Description Docket Report Search Criteria 1 Billable Pages 8 Cost 0.80 https 10/10 Summary: In 2006, the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) and the plaintiff-intervenor, the complainant, filed this class action lawsuit against Pitt-Ohio Express, Inc., a transport company, in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Ohio. The plaintiffs alleged that Pitt-Ohio discriminated against women by refusing to hire women as truck drivers or dockworkers, in violation of Title VII 42 U.S.C. § 2000e. On October 1, 2008, the court approved a settlement agreement between the plaintiff-intervenor and Pitt-Ohio. The defendant agreed to pay in monetary relief and in attorney fees and costs. That same month, the court approved a consent decree between EEOC and Pitt-Ohio. This decree required the defendant to pay to EEOC (to be distributed to women that were affected by the defendant’s discrimination), to adopt anti-discrimination policies, to offer driver and/or dockworker positions to the women that were discriminated against, and regularly report to the EEOC to ensure compliance. This decree had a duration of five years.

In 2006, the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) and the plaintiff-intervenor, the complainant, filed this class action lawsuit against Pitt-Ohio Express, Inc., a transport company, in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Ohio. The plaintiffs alleged that Pitt-Ohio discriminated against women by refusing to hire women as truck drivers or dockworkers, in violation of Title VII 42 U.S.C. § 2000e. On October 1, 2008, the court approved a settlement agreement between the plaintiff-intervenor and Pitt-Ohio. The defendant agreed to pay in monetary relief and in attorney fees and costs. That same month, the court approved a consent decree between EEOC and Pitt-Ohio. This decree required the defendant to pay to EEOC (to be distributed to women that were affected by the defendant’s discrimination), to adopt anti-discrimination policies, to offer driver and/or dockworker positions to the women that were discriminated against, and regularly report to the EEOC to ensure compliance. This decree had a duration of five years.

Using the provided source, generate a concise summary: SECTION Federal Court Says EEOC Disability Blas Lawsuit Against Sears Roebuc... http The U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE August 2, 2005 CONTACT Aaron DeCamp EEOC Trial Attorney (312) TTY (312) Gregory Gochanour EEOC Supervisory Trial Attorney (312) John C. Hendrickson EEOC Regional Attorney (312) FEDERAL COURT SAYS EEOC DISABILITY BIAS LAWSUIT AGAINST SEARS ROEBUCK TO PROCEED Discovery Allowed On Class Claim That Inflexible Leave Policy Failed To Reasonably Accommodate Disabled Employees CHICAGO -- The U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) announced here today that it has received a decision from Federal District Court in Chicago permitting its class case under the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) to proceed against Sears, Roebuck & Company. According to the EEOC, U.S. District Judge Wayne R. Anderson has denied Sears' motion to dismiss the case which alleges that the giant retailer failed to provide one of its Chicago-area employees, John Bava, with a reasonable accommodation after he was injured while working for Sears. EEOC is also seeking relief on behalf of a class of all Sears employees with disabilities who lost their jobs because of Sears' inflexible application of its one year worker's compensation or medical-disability leave policy. EEOC contends that Sears violated Title I of the Americans With Disabilities Act (ADA) by terminating Bava and other employees because they spent more than one year on disability leave and without regard to their individual circumstances and return-to-work prospects. In denying Sear's motion to dismiss the case, Judge Anderson wrote, Even if the EEOC were required to plead a prima facie case of disability discrimination, we believe the facts in the Complaint would survive a motion to dismiss. As for the class allegations, Judge Anderson continued, the Complaint alleges that Sears'maintained an inflexible worker's compensation one year leave policy which does not provide for reasonable accommodation of employees with disabilities.' We find that the issue of whether defendant's leave policy fails to accommodate its disabled employees is an issue upon which defendants have been given notice and is a claim for which EEOC is entitled to discovery. The EEOC lawsuit was filed November 10, 2004, in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Illinois and captioned EEOC v. Sears, Roebuck & Co., Civil Action No. 04 C 7282. Judge Andersen's decision was dated July 22, 2005, and mailed to the parties. Bava worked as a Service Technician out of Sears' Waukegan Road store in Bannock-burn, Illinois, north of Chicago. He was injured when he fell while on the job in April 2001. Although Bava took leave to recover, his injuries left him substantially impaired in his ability to perform physical tasks. According to EEOC, within three months after his injury Bava sought placement in two less physically demanding positions for which he was qualified, but Sears refused to place hire him in either position. As a result, he remained on leave because he was unable to return to his prior service technician job. Ultimately, his employment was terminated under Sears' disability or worker's compensation leave policy that inflexibly mandates the termination of employees on leave for more than one year. John Hendrickson, EEOC Regional Attorney in Chicago said, Sears is an enormous operation and whether or not it complies with the ADA makes a huge difference to thousands of workers. In EEOC's view, sending individuals with disabilities home when they could be working and then firing them when they've been at home 'too long' cannot be squared with what the ADA requires of employers. So we are pleased with the 1 of 2 12 47 PM Federal Court Says EEOC Disability Blas Lawsuit Against Sears Roebuc... http Court's decision that EEOC's case is going to go forward. In addition to Hendrickson, EEOC attorneys on the case are Supervisory Trial Attorney Gregory Gochanour and Trial Attorneys Ethan Cohen and Aaron DeCamp. EEOC is the federal agency charged with the administration, interpretation and enforcement of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, as amended, which prohibits employment discrimination based on race, color, religion, sex, pregnancy or national origin. The EEOC is also responsible for enforcing the Age Discrimination in Employment Act of 1967, as amended; the Equal Pay Act of 1963; and the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990, which prohibits discrimination based on disability. More information about the EEOC and the laws it enforces can also be found at www.eeoc.gov. This page was last modified on August 2, 2005. Return to Home Page 2 of 2 12 47 PM Summary: The EEOC filed suit against Sears Roebuck and Company, alleging that Sears violated the Americans with Disabilities Act by enacting an inflexible workers compensation policy, and failing to provide reasonable accommodations to employees seeking to return to work after injury. The court approved a consent decree, which required payment to individual claimants, revision of policies, recordkeeping, reporting, and training. The matter appears to be closed.

The EEOC filed suit against Sears Roebuck and Company, alleging that Sears violated the Americans with Disabilities Act by enacting an inflexible workers compensation policy, and failing to provide reasonable accommodations to employees seeking to return to work after injury. The court approved a consent decree, which required payment to individual claimants, revision of policies, recordkeeping, reporting, and training. The matter appears to be closed.

Using the provided source, generate a concise summary: SECTION Case 1 Document 39 Filed Page 1 of 25 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF GEORGIA ATLANTA DIVISION HILDA BRUCKER, et al., SECTION PlaintiffSECTION s, v. CITY OF DORAVILLE, a Georgia municipal corporation, SECTION DefendantSECTION. CIVIL ACTION NO. 1 ORDER This case comes before the Court for reconsideration of the City of Doraville’s Motion to Dismiss 15. After reviewing the record and with the benefit of oral argument, the Court enters the following Order. This case involves the system through which Doraville raises revenue from fines, fees, and forfeitures. Doraville, like other Georgia “home rule” municipalities, passes its own criminal ordinances and tries violations of those 1 The facts of this case were fully set out in a previous Order partially ruling on the City’s Motion to Dismiss. (Apr. 1, 2019 Order, Dkt. 30.) For the purposes of this Order, the Court includes a nearly identical—but slightly abbreviated—background to set the stage for deciding the remaining issues. Case 1 Document 39 Filed Page 2 of 25 ordinances in a municipal court. Doraville’s police department primarily enforces the City’s ordinances, except for property violations, which are handled by a private firm. Those municipal servants issue thousands of tickets and citations every year. And the individuals cited or ticketed are ordered to appear at Doraville’s municipal court. At municipal court hearings, the City Attorney acts as prosecutor. The judge presiding over those proceedings is appointed by the City Council and “hold s office at the pleasure of the City Council.” Doraville Municipal Code § 9-1. The municipal court judge is authorized to impose criminal penalties for violations of the City’s code. The standard penalty is a fine of up to $1,000 or six months imprisonment. Overall, the City generates $3 million or more annually from fines, fees, and forfeitures that are prosecuted through the municipal court. Those funds constitute anywhere from 17 to 30 percent of the City’s total yearly revenue. Hence, the City is highly dependent on revenue it derives from its municipal court. And so the City Council includes projected revenue from fines, fees, and forfeitures in its municipal budget. According to SECTION PlaintiffSECTION s—four individuals who have each been convicted or threatened with conviction in Doraville’s municipal court—“the City’s institutional 2 Case 1 Document 39 Filed Page 3 of 25 reliance on revenue from fines and fees” incentivizes “the City to ticket, convict, and fine defendants, regardless of the nature of an individual’s offense” in violation of SECTION PlaintiffSECTION s’ due process rights under the Fourteenth Amendment. SECTION PlaintiffSECTION s filed this lawsuit challenging the City’s conduct under 42 U.S.C. § 1983. Count I challenges the City’s adjudication of municipal violations, while Count II focuses on the incentives for law enforcement officers and prosecutors to obtain convictions. Doraville timely moved to dismiss both counts, (Dkt. 15 ). The City argued this case should be dismissed because the Court lacks subject matter jurisdiction and because SECTION PlaintiffSECTION s’ Complaint fails to state a claim as a matter of law. On April 1, 2019, the Court denied Doraville’s motion, finding that it did indeed have jurisdiction. The Court went on, however, to grant reconsideration (sua sponte) on the Rule portion of the motion and invited supplemental briefing from the parties “to address which standard of review should guide the Court’s analysis... and define the parameters of this case, should it move forward.” Both parties submitted briefs and appeared for oral argument to discuss their positions on June 4, 2019. The Court now reconsiders its previous denial of Doraville’s motion. Discussion I. Motion to Dismiss Standard 3 Case 1 Document 39 Filed Page 4 of 25 Federal Rule of Civil Procedure requires that a pleading contain a “short and plain statement of the claim showing that the Summary: On May 23, 2018, four individuals who had been ticketed or threatened to be ticketed by the City of Doraville filed this lawsuit in U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Georgia. The case was assigned to Judge Richard W. Story. Represented by Strickland Brockington Lewis, LLP, and the Institute for Justice, the plaintiffs sued the City of Doraville under 42 U.S.C. Section 1983 and the Declaratory Judgments Act. The plaintiffs alleged that the city’s policy and practice of using its law enforcement and municipal court system for revenue generation violated the plaintiffs' due process rights. The plaintiffs sought declarative and injunctive relief from Doraville’s policy and practice of budgeting to receive revenues from fines and fees. The defendant sought to dismiss the case on July 2, 2018; the court denied the motion to dismiss on July 9, 2019. This case is ongoing.

On May 23, 2018, four individuals who had been ticketed or threatened to be ticketed by the City of Doraville filed this lawsuit in U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Georgia. The case was assigned to Judge Richard W. Story. Represented by Strickland Brockington Lewis, LLP, and the Institute for Justice, the plaintiffs sued the City of Doraville under 42 U.S.C. Section 1983 and the Declaratory Judgments Act. The plaintiffs alleged that the city’s policy and practice of using its law enforcement and municipal court system for revenue generation violated the plaintiffs' due process rights. The plaintiffs sought declarative and injunctive relief from Doraville’s policy and practice of budgeting to receive revenues from fines and fees. The defendant sought to dismiss the case on July 2, 2018; the court denied the motion to dismiss on July 9, 2019. This case is ongoing.

Using the provided source, generate a concise summary: SECTION Case 4 Document 191 Filed in USDC ND/OK on Page 1 of 35 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF OKLAHOMA RICHARD on behalf of ) himself and all others similarly ) ) SECTION PlaintiffSECTION, ) ) v. ) ) BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF ) THE COUNTY OF TULSA; VIC REGALADO, ) Tulsa County Sheriff, in his official capacity; ) TERRY H. BITTING, TAMMY BRUCE, ) MARTHA RUPP CARTER, STEPHEN R. ) CLARK, THERESA DREILING, OWEN ) EVENS, JAMES W. KEELEY, DEBORAH ) LUDI LEITCH, J. ANTHONY MILLER, ) DAWN MOODY, MILLIE OTEY, KIRSTEN ) PACE, APRIL SEIBERT, CLIFFORD SMITH, ) AND SARAH SMITH, in their capacities as ) Tulsa County Special Judges; AND WILLIAM ) LAFORTUNE, in his capacity as Tulsa County ) District Court ) ) SECTION DefendantSECTION s. ) Case No. 1 When the first amended complaint was filed, there were four named plaintiffs. See Dkt. # 32. In an opinion and order dated April 24, 2020, the Court terminated the three named plaintiffs other than Feltz because one had died, and two were no longer represented by counsel. 2 SECTION PlaintiffSECTION filed his motions on behalf of all putative class members. Dkt. # 158, at n.1. The motion for class certification (Dkt. # 3) is pending. However, the Court need not certify the class at this point to resolve the present motions. See Gooch v. Life Investors Ins. Co. of Am., 672 F.3d 402, 433 (6th Cir. 2012) (“ T here is nothing improper about a preliminary injunction preceding a ruling on class certification.”); Kansas Health Care Ass’n, Inc. v. Kansas Dept. of Social and Rehabilitation Svs., 31 F.3d 1536, 1548 (10th Cir. 1994) (“We therefore affirm the district court’s conclusion that class certification was unnecessary in this case in which a preliminary injunction was granted.”). 3 At the time of the amended complaint (Dkt. # 32), Judge Musseman was the presiding judge of Tulsa County District Court. However, Judge LaFortune became presiding judge on January 1, 2020, and was automatically substituted for Judge Musseman pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 25(d). Neither party objected to this substitution, and the Court so ordered. Case 4 Document 191 Filed in USDC ND/OK on Page 2 of 35 OPINION AND ORDER The issue presented in plaintiff’s motions for preliminary injunction and temporary restraining order (Dkt. ## 158, 159) is whether indigent arrestees who are unable to make bail should be released from jail, particularly now during the new coronavirus pandemic because of risk of exposure. Courts around the country have been wrestling with this issue and, unfortunately, the Tenth Circuit has yet to address it. It is against this backdrop that the Court analyzes the facts and the preliminary injunctive relief standard to come to a fair result pending a trial on the merits. In many jails, has spread rapidly. In Tulsa, however, there are no confirmed cases of the among inmates at the jail. There have been significant changes in bail processes and at the jail since this lawsuit was filed. A new local criminal rule has been adopted, which defendants allege fixes any alleged constitutional problems with the bail system. The Sheriff has implemented a plan to combat which substantially follows national guidance. The parties dispute whether these new processes are implemented as they are written, and whether they foreclose constitutional scrutiny. Discovery is ongoing, and a motion to dismiss for lack of subject matter jurisdiction (Dkt. # 157) remains outstanding. In light of the progress made in the bail system and the parties involved, namely state and local policymakers, it seems inappropriate for a federal court to interfere with state and local policy at this time. Moreover, the relief plaintiff seeks—a preliminary injunction against the Sheriff—would do nothing to rectify the bail system; that is the province of the Tulsa County District 2 Case 4 Document 191 Filed in USDC ND/OK on Page 3 of 35 Thus, the Court will confine its analysis at this juncture to the Summary: Civil Rights Corps sued Tulsa County and various judicial officers, alleging that the court system operated a wealth-based detention system by detaining arrestees without inquiring into their ability to pay bail. While the plaintiffs motion for preliminary injunction was denied, the plaintiffs motion for class certification is still pending.

Civil Rights Corps sued Tulsa County and various judicial officers, alleging that the court system operated a wealth-based detention system by detaining arrestees without inquiring into their ability to pay bail. While the plaintiffs motion for preliminary injunction was denied, the plaintiffs motion for class certification is still pending.

Using the provided source, generate a concise summary: SECTION U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission PRESS RELEASE Beverage Distributors Ordered to Pay About $200K and Hire Sight-Impaired Employee in EEOC Disability Discrimination Suit Jury Found Company Violated Federal Law by Shunning Legally Blind Applicant DENVER - In a disability lawsuit brought by the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC), a federal court in Denver has ordered Beverage Distributors Company (BDC) in Colorado to pay around and hire him to a position he had been denied because of his impaired eyesight, the agency announced today. According to the EEOC's suit, Mike Sungaila, who is legally blind, worked for BDC for over four years as a driver's helper. When the company decided to eliminate his position and instead use contract laborers, Sungaila applied for a position as a night warehouse loader. BDC offered Sungaila the position subject to a pre-employment medical examination. Following the medical examination, BDC withdrew the job offer, believing that Sungaila could not safely perform the functions of the position due to his poor eyesight. The position involves loading cases of liquor and kegs of beer into the back of trucks. The EEOC, contending that Sungaila could safely perform the job, filed suit in U.S. District Court for the District of Colorado after first attempting to reach a pre-litigation settlement through its conciliation process. EEOC v. Beverage Distributors Company, LLC, Following a four-day trial in April, the jury agreed with the EEOC that BDC intentionally violated the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) when it withdrew its job offer to Sungaila because of his impaired eyesight. The jury initially awarded Sungaila in back pay, but found that his damages should be reduced by because the jury believed that Sungaila could have mitigated his damages by finding a comparable position. This week, U.S. District Judge Christine Arguello vacated the jury's finding that Sungaila could have mitigated his damages, finding that BDC failed to prove there were any available comparable jobs that Sungaila could have performed, and ordered BDC to pay Sungaila his entire back pay. Moreover, BDC must pay interest on the award, which will increase the award to approximately and must compensate Sungaila for any tax consequence he will suffer due to being paid this judgment in one year. In addition, the court ordered BDC to hire Sungaila as a night warehouse loader with the same seniority that he would have had BDC not withdrawn the job offer due to his eyesight. Sungaila must be offered this position within the next six months and will be paid the same salary as other employees who have been employed in the position for five years, which is approximately $23 per hour. The court also found that the testimony of Beverage Distributors managers and human resources professionals demonstrated a lack of sufficient knowledge about the ADA, its interactive process, and the requirement that reasonable accommodations be provided to employees. The judge also stated that BDC's employee handbook was insufficient to explain to employees how they can request accommodations and contained an incorrect statement of its obligations under the law. Therefore, the court ordered that BDC must engage an outside consultant to provide employee training and assistance in revisions to BDC's policies, job postings, notice posting, and reporting and compliance review. BDC must report to the court within six months that it has complied with the judge's order. The Commission is always willing to resolve cases informally, said EEOC General Counsel P. David Lopez. As we have demonstrated consistently nationwide, when necessary, we will try the case and secure both monetary relief for the victim and, importantly, non-monetary relief to ensure the company modifies it practices so that the discrimination does not recur. The Commission has prevailed in 10 of its past 11 jury trials. Employers must provide accommodations for qualified individuals with disabilities and must base all employment-related decisions on facts, not stereotypical assumptions about an employee's abilities, said EEOC Regional Attorney Mary Jo O'Neill. We believe this order will ensure that going forward, individuals with disabilities will no longer be discriminated against by Beverage Distributors. Further, this decision will send a message to all employers that it does not pay to discriminate. EEOC Denver Field Office Director Nancy Sienko added, We are excited that Mr. Sungaila will finally be fully compensated for the harm that he suffered due to discrimination by his former employer. The EEOC is responsible for enforcing federal laws against employment discrimination. Further information is available at www.eeoc.gov. Further information about the EEOC is available on its website at www.eeoc.gov. Summary: On September 29, 2011, the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission ( EEOC ) brought this lawsuit against Beverage Distributors Company, LLC ( BDC ) on behalf of a visually impaired company employee in the U.S. District Court for the District of Colorado under the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990 ( ADA ). The EEOC claimed that BDC discriminated against the employee in violation of the ADA when it conditioned his employment on the results of a medical exam and subsequently refused to hire him as a night warehouse loader upon learning that he had a disability. The jury initially awarded the employee in back pay, but it found that his damages should be reduced by because he could have mitigated those damages by finding a comparable position. On December 9, 2013, the District Court vacated these findings and awarded injunctive relief, only to be reversed by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit because of erroneous jury instructions. The 10th Circuit denied the EEOC's petition for rehearing in May 2015. The parties entered into a consent decree in December 2015, and the matter appears to be closed.

On September 29, 2011, the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission ( EEOC ) brought this lawsuit against Beverage Distributors Company, LLC ( BDC ) on behalf of a visually impaired company employee in the U.S. District Court for the District of Colorado under the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990 ( ADA ). The EEOC claimed that BDC discriminated against the employee in violation of the ADA when it conditioned his employment on the results of a medical exam and subsequently refused to hire him as a night warehouse loader upon learning that he had a disability. The jury initially awarded the employee in back pay, but it found that his damages should be reduced by because he could have mitigated those damages by finding a comparable position. On December 9, 2013, the District Court vacated these findings and awarded injunctive relief, only to be reversed by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit because of erroneous jury instructions. The 10th Circuit denied the EEOC's petition for rehearing in May 2015. The parties entered into a consent decree in December 2015, and the matter appears to be closed.

Using the provided source, generate a concise summary: SECTION SECTION Case SECTION 2 As of 10 33 AM EST 1 of 4 CLOSED,STANDARD United States District Court Eastern District of Pennsylvania (Philadelphia) CIVIL DOCKET FOR CASE # 2 BROWN et al v. FREE LIBRARY OF PHILADELPHIA Assigned to HONORABLE MITCHELL S. GOLDBERG Cause 42 12101 The Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990 SECTION PlaintiffSECTION Date Filed Date Terminated Jury Demand SECTION DefendantSECTION Nature of Suit 446 Civil Rights Americans with Disabilities - Other Jurisdiction Federal Question DENICE BROWN represented by DANIEL F. GOLDSTEIN BROWN, GOLDSTEIN AND LEVY 120 EAST BALTIMORE ST SUITE 1700 BALTIMORE, MD 21202 Email [email protected] LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED DANIEL A. ROSS BROWN GOLDSTEIN &LEVY LLP 120 EAST BALTIMORE ST BALTIMORE, MD 21202 Email [email protected] TERMINATED LEAD ATTORNEY PRO HAC VICE DAVID RUDOVSKY KAIRYS RUDOVSKY MESSING &FEINBERG LLP THE CAST IRON BLDG STE 501 SOUTH 718 ARCH STREET PHILADELPHIA, PA 19106 Fax Email [email protected] LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED SHARON KREVOR-WEISBAUM BROWN GOLDSTEIN &LEVY LLP 120 EAST BALTIMORE ST STE 1700 BALTIMORE, MD 21202 Email [email protected] LEAD ATTORNEY PRO HAC VICE ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED SECTION PlaintiffSECTION KAREN COMORATO represented by DANIEL F. GOLDSTEIN (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED DANIEL A. ROSS SECTION Case SECTION 2 As of 10 33 AM EST 2 of 4 (See above for address) TERMINATED LEAD ATTORNEY PRO HAC VICE DAVID RUDOVSKY (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED SHARON KREVOR-WEISBAUM (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY PRO HAC VICE ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED SECTION PlaintiffSECTION PATRICIA GREBLOSKI represented by DANIEL F. GOLDSTEIN (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED DANIEL A. ROSS (See above for address) TERMINATED LEAD ATTORNEY PRO HAC VICE DAVID RUDOVSKY (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED SHARON KREVOR-WEISBAUM (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY PRO HAC VICE ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED SECTION PlaintiffSECTION ANTOINETTE WHALEY represented by DANIEL F. GOLDSTEIN (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED DANIEL A. ROSS (See above for address) TERMINATED LEAD ATTORNEY PRO HAC VICE DAVID RUDOVSKY (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED SHARON KREVOR-WEISBAUM (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY PRO HAC VICE ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED SECTION Case SECTION 2 As of 10 33 AM EST 3 of 4 V. SECTION DefendantSECTION FREE LIBRARY OF PHILADELPHIA represented by CRAIG M. STRAW CITY OF PHILADELPHIA LAW DEPARTMENT 1515 ARCH STREET 14TH FLOOR PHILA, PA 19102 Email [email protected] LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED AMANDA C SHOFFEL CITY OF PHILADELPHIA LAW DEPARTMENT 1515 ARCH STREET 14TH FLOOR PHILDELPHIA, PA 19102 Email [email protected] ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED Date Filed # Docket Text 1 COMPLAINT against FREE LIBRARY OF PHILADELPHIA ( Filing fee $ 350 receipt number filed by DENICE BROWN, KAREN COMORATO, ANTOINETTE WHALEY, PATRICIA GREBLOSKI. (Attachments # 1 Exhibits, # 2 Civil Cover Sheets)(tj, ) (Entered Summons Issued as to FREE LIBRARY OF PHILADELPHIA. Forwarded To Counsel on 5/2/12 (tj, ) (Entered 2 APPLICATION FOR THOSE ATTORNEYS (DANIEL F. GOLDSTEIN) SEEKING TO PRACTICE IN THIS COURT by DENICE BROWN, KAREN COMORATO, PATRICIA GREBLOSKI, ANTOINETTE WHALEY, Certificate of Service. (Fee Paid $40.00 Receipt (tj, ) (Entered 3 APPLICATION FOR THOSE ATTORNEYS (DANIEL A. ROSS) SEEKING TO PRACTICE IN THIS COURT by DENICE BROWN, KAREN COMORATO, PATRICIA GREBLOSKI, ANTOINETTE WHALEY, Certificate of Service. (Fee Paid $40.00 Receipt (tj, ) (Entered 4 APPLICATION FOR THOSE ATTORNEYS (SHARON KREVOR-WEISBAUM) SEEKING TO PRACTICE IN THIS COURT by DENICE BROWN, KAREN COMORATO, PATRICIA GREBLOSKI, ANTOINETTE WHALEY, Certificate of Service. (Fee Paid $40.00 Receipt (tj, ) (Entered 5 ORDER THAT THE APPLICATION OF DANIEL F. GOLDSTEIN, ESQUIRE, TO PRACTICE IN THIS COURT PURSUANT TO LOCAL RULE OF CIVIL PROCEDURE IS GRANTED. SIGNED BY HONORABLE MITCHELL S. GOLDBERG ON ENTERED AND COPIES MAILED, E-MAILED.(tomg, ) (Entered 6 ORDER THAT THE APPLICATION OF SHARON KREVOR-WEISBAUM, ESQUIRE, TO PRACTICE IN THIS COURT PURSUANT TO LOCAL RULE OF CIVIL PROCEDURE IS GRANTED. SIGNED BY HONORABLE MITCHELL S. GOLDBERG ON ENTERED AND COPIES MAILED, E-MAILED.(tomg, ) (Entered 7 ORDER THAT THE APPLICATION OF DANIEL A. ROSS, ESQUIRE, TO PRACTICE IN THIS COURT PURSUANT TO LOCAL RULE OF CIVIL PROCEDURE IS GRANTED. SIGNED BY HONORABLE SECTION Case SECTION 2 As of 10 33 AM EST 4 of 4 MITCHELL S. GOLDBERG ON ENTERED AND COPIES MAILED, E-MAILED.(tomg, ) (Entered Copy of Order dated and envelope returned from the U.S. Postal Service addressed to DANIEL F. GOLDSTEIN for the following reason Returned to Sender. Unable to Forward. (ems) (Entered 8 Joint STIPULATION for Extension of Time to File Response/Reply as to 1 Complaint by Stipulation of All Parties filed by FREE LIBRARY OF PHILADELPHIA. (STRAW, CRAIG) (FILED IN ERROR BY ATTORNEY; COPY FORWARDED TO JUDGE FOR APPROVAL) Modified on (nd). (Entered 9 STIPULATION AND ORDER THAT DEFTS' RESPONSIVE PLEADING TO PLAINTIFFS' COMPLAINT SHALL BE DUE ON OR BEFORE SIGNED BY HONORABLE MITCHELL S. GOLDBERG ON ENTERED AND COPIES E-MAILED.(tomg, ) (Entered 10 NOTICE of Appearance by AMANDA C SHOFFEL on behalf of FREE LIBRARY OF PHILADELPHIA with Jury Demand(SHOFFEL, AMANDA) (Entered 11 STIPULATION for Extension of Time to File a Responsive Pleading by FREE LIBRARY OF PHILADELPHIA. (SHOFFEL, AMANDA). (FILED IN ERROR BY ATTORNEY; FORWARDED TO JUDGE FOR APPROVAL). Modified on (ahf, ). (Entered 12 STIPULATION AND ORDER THAT DEFTS' RESPONSIVE PLEADING TO PLAINTIFFS' COMPLAINT SHALL BE DUE ON OR BEFORE SIGNED BY HONORABLE MITCHELL S. GOLDBERG ON ENTERED AND COPIES E-MAILED.(tomg, ) (Entered 13 NOTICE of Withdrawal of Appearance by DANIEL A. ROSS on behalf of All SECTION PlaintiffSECTION s (ROSS, DANIEL) (Entered 14 NOTICE of Voluntary Dismissal by All SECTION PlaintiffSECTION s (Attachments # 1 Exhibit Settlement Agreement)(GOLDSTEIN, DANIEL) (Attachment 1 replaced on (nd, ). (Entered Summary: Four blind or visually impaired library patrons sued the Free Library of Philadelphia in in the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania, seeking relief under Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act, and Title II of the ADA. They alleged that the Library's new program to lend e-reading devices was discriminatory, because the Nook Simple Touch devices the library had procured were inaccessible to visually impaired users, and because accessible alternative devices were available. The parties entered a settlement and the case was dismissed. The library agreed to transition to the exclusive use of accessible devices within four years, and to add ten accessible e-readers within 60 days of the settlement date.

Four blind or visually impaired library patrons sued the Free Library of Philadelphia in in the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania, seeking relief under Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act, and Title II of the ADA. They alleged that the Library's new program to lend e-reading devices was discriminatory, because the Nook Simple Touch devices the library had procured were inaccessible to visually impaired users, and because accessible alternative devices were available. The parties entered a settlement and the case was dismissed. The library agreed to transition to the exclusive use of accessible devices within four years, and to add ten accessible e-readers within 60 days of the settlement date.

Using the provided source, generate a concise summary: SECTION UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF COLORADO Civil Action No. TIMOTHY RICHARDSON and JONATHAN STEELE, SECTION PlaintiffSECTION s, and THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, SECTION PlaintiffSECTION -Intervenor, v. CITY OF STEAMBOAT SPRINGS, SECTION DefendantSECTION. ________________________________________________________________ _ CONSENT DECREE ________________________________________________________________ _ I. INTRODUCTION On July 1, 1999, Timothy Richardson and Jonathan Steele (“Individual SECTION PlaintiffSECTION s”) filed a Complaint against the City of Steamboat Springs, Colorado (“City”), alleging that the City had discriminated against them on the basis of disability in connection with the provision of transit service and certain other City services, in violation of Title II of the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990 (“ADA”), 42 U.S.C. §§ and Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973 (“Rehabilitation Act”), 29 U.S.C. § 794. By Order dated April 20, 2000, the United States intervened in Individual SECTION PlaintiffSECTION s’ action against the City to the extent that it alleged violations of transportation provisions of the ADA and the Rehabilitation Act. The United States, the Individual SECTION PlaintiffSECTION s, and the City desire to settle the action between them without the burden of prolonged litigation. This Consent Decree resolves all allegations raised by the United States in its Complaint, and the allegations of Individual SECTION PlaintiffSECTION s in their Complaint that deal with the transportation issues raised in the Complaint of the United States. This Consent Decree also resolves the Individual SECTION PlaintiffSECTION s’ allegations concerning the nontransportation issues in which the United States did not join. The parties waive, for the purposes of this Consent Decree only, a hearing and findings of fact and conclusions of law on all issues raised by the United States in its Complaint and the like issues raised by the Individual SECTION PlaintiffSECTION s in their Complaint. For purposes of this Consent Decree, the City acknowledges that Individual SECTION PlaintiffSECTION s are prevailing parties under 42 U.S.C. § 12205. At any hearing on a motion for attorney fees and costs, 1 the City shall not assert that the Individual SECTION PlaintiffSECTION s were not prevailing parties. It is therefore ORDERED ADJUDGED AND DECREED as follows II. PROSPECTIVE RELIEF A. By August 1, 2002, the City shall ensure that all vehicles in its active inventory of vehicles used in its fixed route system are readily accessible to and usable by individuals with disabilities who use wheelchairs. B. The City shall maintain in operative condition the wheelchair lifts on all existing vehicles and all vehicles acquired in the future for use on the City’s fixed route system, provided that the City may decommission its TMC buses for use of parts from the wheelchair lifts thereon for purposes of maintaining other buses’ wheelchair lifts. C. Within thirty (30) days of the entry of this Consent Decree and for a minimum term of five (5) months, the City shall lease for use on the fixed route system two (2) vans or minibuses, and shall, at the same time, retire two of the five inaccessible Ford vans which the City purchased in 1996 and 1997 without engaging in good faith efforts required under the ADA to locate accessible used vans. The City agrees that until it can permanently replace the three remaining inaccessible Ford vans in accord with its recent purchase of new accessible vans for anticipated delivery by Summer 2001, the remaining inaccessible vans will be used only on a reserve basis in case of emergency. 2 D. The City has established and shall continue to employ a system of regular and frequent maintenance checks of wheelchair lifts on all vehicles. The maintenance checks shall include daily lift cycling to occur at the outset of each service day. If the maintenance checks disclose an inoperative lift on a given vehicle, the City shall promptly remove said vehicle from service for repairs, and the City shall not utilize the vehicle for service until the repairs are accomplished. When a wheelchair lift is discovered to be inoperative after the bus is in service, the City shall remove said vehicle from service for repairs at the end of that service day or as soon as a spare vehicle with an operative lift can take its place, whichever occurs sooner; provided that if there is no spare vehicle with an operative lift available to be substituted, and taking the vehicle out of service will substantially delay the transportation service the City has scheduled, the City may keep the vehicle with an inoperative lift in service for up to two service days. E. Effective immediately upon the entry of this Consent Decree, the City shall make and maintain for the duration of this Consent Decree records relating to wheelchair lift operation, maintenance and repair, including the number of the vehicle involved, the date of each lift cycling and each lift operation; the date and time of each report of lift malfunction; the date and time the vehicle was removed from service for repair; if the vehicle was kept in service due to delay in scheduled service, the amount of delay; a description of the 3 cause of malfunction and the repair performed; the date the vehicle was returned to service after repair; and the names of the employees conducting lift cycling and operation, reporting lift malfunctions, and performing the repairs. F. Effective upon the entry of this Consent Decree, whenever a disabled individual using a wheelchair encounters a City bus or van without a wheelchair lift or with a lift that does not operate for any reason, the City shall continue its practice of promptly dispatching an accessible vehicle to provide transportation to the individual unable to board the previous vehicle. At the time the City operator requests dispatch of such alternate transportation, the operator shall inform the disabled individual of the expected time of arrival of the accessible vehicle, and when the dispatcher is on duty, the dispatcher shall record the times of the request and the dispatch of alternate transportation. G. The City shall continue to provide comprehensive training for all bus and van operators, dispatchers, and mechanics. The City shall also provide said training upon hiring of any new operator or mechanic, whether or not said employee previously worked for the City. The City shall also provide timely refresher training for any operator or mechanic if and when said employee demonstrates a lack of knowledge of proper wheelchair lift operation, maintenance, and repair. Refresher training for operators shall also be provided at or about the beginning of winter. The training shall include courses available from wheelchair lift and/or bus manufacturers 4 to cover the proper operation, maintenance, and repair of lifts. The training shall also include hands-on training for all operators that includes proper deployment and stowing of wheelchair lifts utilizing both hydraulic and manual systems, if they exist; proper operation of lifts during inclement weather; procedures in compliance with paragraph F, above, for dispatching of alternate transportation when disabled individuals using wheelchairs cannot board a City vehicle; and the provision of adequate time in operating the lifts to allow individuals with disabilities to safely complete boarding and disembarking from the vehicle. The training shall also include general information about applicable Department of Transportation regulations under Title II of the ADA and appropriate behavior in interacting with individuals with disabilities. To insure the effectiveness of its training, the City shall utilize a self-evaluation program to establish criteria and test each trainee's competency at the conclusion of the training. The City shall make and maintain for the duration of this Consent Decree records showing the dates and hours of training, names of instructors and students, and the subject matter covered. H. The City shall continue working directly with organizations representing persons who are mobility-impaired, to develop and implement a public education program to promote the use of the City’s transit system by individuals with mobility impairments. I. The United States, the City and the Individual 5 SECTION PlaintiffSECTION s agree and hereby acknowledge that, since the United States did not intervene in the non-transportation allegations of the Individual SECTION PlaintiffSECTION s’ Complaint, the United States is not party to Section II(J) of this Consent Decree and that only the City and Individual SECTION PlaintiffSECTION s are party to Section (II(J)). J. By agreeing to and voluntarily entering into this section (II(J)) of the Consent Decree, there is no admission or concession by the City, express or implied, that it has in any way violated the ADA or the Rehabilitation Act, or any other federal, state, or local law, regulation, order, or rule. The City denies and continues to deny that it has violated any such laws pertaining to the access issues addressed in this section (II(J)) of the Consent Decree. The City denies and continues to deny any and all liability to Individual SECTION PlaintiffSECTION s for any such claims. As part of this Consent Decree, the City agrees to the following 1. The three, accessible parking spaces on the east side of the rodeo grounds at Howelsen Hill complex shall continue to exist as designated, accessible spaces for the term of this Consent Decree. 2. On or before June 22, 2001, the City shall construct an all-weather, compacted fines trail surface from the east side to the west side of the rodeo grounds, with removable hard surfacing access across the rodeo arena livestock entry and track, with associated clear gates or other openings. 3. In order to provide access to people who use 1 wheelchairs or other mobility aids, effective upon entry of this Consent Decree and, as an ongoing requirement of the Decree, the City shall snowplow or shovel all walkways of the rodeo grounds, including the area referenced in Section of this Decree and the areas referenced in Sections and of this Decree. 4. On or before June 22, 2001, the City shall install in the accessible, modular seating platform adjacent to the rodeo grandstand a sign that states that the security officer, who is stationed at this location, will provide umbrellas to those individuals requesting them. 5. On or before June 22, 2001, the City shall modify, as needed to comply with the Americans with Disabilities Act Accessibility Guidelines (“ADAAG”), a men’s and a women’s restroom on the east side of the rodeo grounds. 6. On or before June 22, 2001, the City shall reconfigure the concrete ramp to the overflow seating area at the rodeo grounds so that such ramp has a slope that complies with ADAAG. In addition, on or before June 22, 2001, the City shall add ADAAG-compliant, accessible seating in the overflow seating area by painting stripes on the landing to the overflow seating area. 7. On or before January 25, 2001, the City shall construct an all-weather, compacted fines trail surface around the north side of the poma lift house on the Howelsen Hill complex to the bleachers to the ski-jumping, 2 viewing area, and to, and through, the existing fence on the north side of the poma lift house, for access to the concert venue/amphitheater. 8. On or before January 25, 2001, the City shall place removable, hard-surfacing access across ski-able terrain during World Cup events, from the Howelsen Hill Lodge parking lot to the bleachers, for access to the ski- jumping, viewing area. 9. Upon entry of this Consent Decree, the City shall modify in compliance with ADAAG the fire doors to Howelsen Hill Lodge. 10. Effective upon entry of this Consent Decree, the City shall prohibit parking along the fence in front of and to the east of Howelsen Hill Lodge during winter and summer scheduling of the Lodge, as well as during special events, to ensure that safe access is available for the public to the main, entry doors to the Lodge. 11. On or before January 25, 2001, the City shall install automatic door openers to the restroom doors on the first floor of Howelsen Hill Lodge or turn those doors in such a manner to ensure that they comply with ADAAG. 12. On or before September 3, 2001, the City shall create two ADAAG-compliant parking spaces at the Alpine Slide/stables area. 13. On or before September 3, 2001, the City shall ramp or otherwise provide access to the restrooms at the Alpine Slide/stables area. 1 14. On or before September 3, 2001, the City shall modify the existing restrooms located between the rodeo grounds overflow seating and the Alpine Slide/stables parking lot so that such restrooms comply with ADAAG. 15. Effective upon entry of this Consent Decree, the City shall require its bus drivers to stop at the accessible, bus loading zone located just west of the bus shelter at 7th Street and Lincoln Avenue in the City to pick up and drop off people with disabilities in wheelchairs or other mobility aids. 16. To the extent that it has not already been accomplished, effective upon entry of this Consent Decree, the City shall request the Steamboat Ski & Resort Corporation to post an “ADA Loading Only” zone sign at the curbside of the extreme south end of the Gondola Transit Center, where City buses, before proceeding into whatever stall they would normally use for loading and unloading at the Transit Center, must stop if a person in a wheelchair or other mobility aid is waiting to board a City bus or exit a City bus that is entering the Gondola Transit Center. 17. The City does not contest that Individual SECTION PlaintiffSECTION s are entitled to their reasonable attorneys’ fees and costs. If the parties cannot otherwise reach agreement as to the amount of SECTION PlaintiffSECTION s’ attorneys’ fees and costs, the parties agree that the amount of such fees and costs will be determined by Judge Weinshienk, and the City shall pay 9 those attorneys’ fees and costs awarded by Judge Weinshienk within ten (10) days after the date of the Order entering such award or within ten (10) days of the resolution of any appeal of such Order. III. INDIVIDUAL REMEDIAL RELIEF The City shall pay Mr. Richardson the sum of $ and Mr. Steele the sum of $ in compensatory damages relating to the claims contained in the two Complaints. IV. IMPLEMENTATION OF DECREE It is further ORDERED that A. Within ninety (90) days of the entry of this Consent Decree, the City shall submit its first report to counsel for the United States and for Individual SECTION PlaintiffSECTION s detailing the actions it has taken to comply with this Consent Decree. Within one hundred-eighty (180) days of the entry of this Consent Decree, the City shall submit its second report to counsel for the United States and for Individual SECTION PlaintiffSECTION s detailing the actions it has taken to comply with this Consent Decree. B. During the four-year period following the entry of this Consent Decree, the City shall summarize and send to counsel for the United States and Individual SECTION PlaintiffSECTION s on an annual basis, measured from the date of entry of the Consent Decree, a list of wheelchair lift malfunctions and repairs, the dates and times of the provision of alternate transportation as 10 provided in paragraph II(F), above, vehicle purchases, and vehicle leases, along with dates thereof. C. As and for the final annual report, the City shall provide a report to counsel for the United States and the Individual SECTION PlaintiffSECTION s forty-five (45) days prior to the expiration date of the Consent Decree, detailing all actions taken to comply with this Consent Decree. D. The City shall retain during the life of this Consent Decree records required by this Consent Decree, and any other records necessary to document the implementation of and continued compliance with this Consent Decree. The City shall allow counsel for the United States and Individual SECTION PlaintiffSECTION s to review and copy such records upon reasonable notice. E. Within thirty (30) days of the entry of this Consent Decree by the Court, Timothy Richardson and Jonathan Steele shall provide to the undersigned counsel for the City an executed Release Form in the form attached as Appendix A to this Consent Decree. F. Within ten (10) days of the receipt by the City’s counsel of Mr. Richardson’s and Mr. Steele’s executed Release Forms, they shall be paid the amount described in paragraph III. Payment shall be forwarded to Mr. Richardson and Mr. Steele via certified mail, return receipt requested, for receipt by their counsel within the ten days described above. A copy of any check and any accompanying correspondence shall be mailed to counsel for the United States. 11 G. The parties shall attempt to resolve informally any dispute that may occur under this Consent Decree. If the parties are unable to reach agreement to resolve a dispute within thirty (30) days after the issue has been raised, the dispute may be submitted to the Court for resolution. H. The Court shall retain jurisdiction over this Consent Decree for the purposes of enforcing it, resolving any dispute that may arise under this Consent Decree, and entering such further orders as may be appropriate. I. This Consent Decree shall terminate four (4) years from the date of its entry unless, before its termination, the Court finds good cause to extend any provision herein. J. This Consent Decree shall be final and binding on the parties to this action, including all principals, agents, employees of the City. K. Nothing in this Consent Decree shall preclude the United States from filing a separate action under the ADA and/or the Rehabilitation Act for any future alleged violation occurring after the date of entry of this Consent Decree. L. The United States and the City shall bear their own costs, including attorneys’ fees, except that all parties retain the right to seek costs for any matter that, in the future, may arise from this Consent Decree and require resolution by the Court. Respectfully submitted, 12 BILL LANN LEE Assistant Attorney General Civil Rights Division JOHN L. WODATCH Chief, Disability Rights Section ALLISON J. NICHOL Deputy Chief Disability Rights Section Harold L. Jackson Whitney L. Ellenby Attorneys for SECTION PlaintiffSECTION -Intervenor United States Department of Justice Civil Rights Division Disability Rights Section P.O. Box 66738 Washington, D.C. Telephone (202) Dated ___________________ Timothy P. Fox Michael W. Breeskin Amy F. Robertson FOX & ROBERTSON, P.C. Attorneys for SECTION PlaintiffSECTION s Timothy Richardson and Jonathan Steele 910 16th Street, Suite 610 Denver, Colorado 80202 Telephone Dated _________________ David R. Brougham HALL EVANS, L.L.C. Attorney for SECTION DefendantSECTION City of 13 Steamboat Springs 1200 17th Street, Suite 1700 Denver, Colorado 80202 Telephone Dated _____________________ It is so ORDERED, this _____ day of ________, 2000. ____________________________ ZITA L. WEINSHIENK United States District Judge APPENDIX A RELEASE FORM Timothy Richardson and Jonathan Steele, and United States v. City of Steamboat Springs, Colorado 14 STATE OF COLORADO For and in consideration of the payment of compensatory damages pursuant to the provisions of the Consent Decree entered by the Honorable Zita L. Weinshienk, United States District Judge, on date, in the above-styled case, I, name of plaintiff, hereby release and forever discharge the City of Steamboat Springs, Colorado, from those legal and equitable claims that are raised in the Complaints of the United States and of Timothy Richardson and Jonathan Steele, in Timothy Richardson and Jonathan Steele, and United States v. City of Steamboat Springs, Colorado, Civil Action No. This Release constitutes the entire agreement between myself and the City of Steamboat Springs, Colorado, without exception or exclusion. I acknowledge that a copy of the Consent Decree in this action has been made available to me. I HAVE READ THIS RELEASE AND UNDERSTAND THE CONTENTS THEREOF AND I EXECUTE THIS RELEASE OF MY OWN FREE ACT AND DEED. Signed this _______day of _________________, 2000. ________________________________ name of plaintiff Sworn and subscribed to before me this ______day of _______________, 2000. _______________________________ NOTARY PUBLIC My commission expires ______________ 15 Summary: Disabled plaintiffs sued a public transit agency for violation of the Americans With Disabilities Act and the Rehabilitation Act, alleging their bus system presented numerous barriers to access, subjecting the plaintiffs to delay, embarrassment, and ridicule by passengers and drivers. The parties entered a consent decree, in which the defendant agreed to remedy the problems with its bus system and pay in damages, fees, and costs.

Disabled plaintiffs sued a public transit agency for violation of the Americans With Disabilities Act and the Rehabilitation Act, alleging their bus system presented numerous barriers to access, subjecting the plaintiffs to delay, embarrassment, and ridicule by passengers and drivers. The parties entered a consent decree, in which the defendant agreed to remedy the problems with its bus system and pay in damages, fees, and costs.

Using the provided source, generate a concise summary: SECTION EEOC LITIGATION SETTLEMENT REPORT - July 2004 http EEOC v. Huntwood Industries No. (E.D. Wash. July 21, 2004) The Seattle District Office filed a Title VII sexual harassment suit against a leading manufacturer of custom cabinets. Seattle alleged that management at the company's main production facility in Spokane, Washington failed to take appropriate action after charging party, a female cabinet maker, complained about constant lewd remarks, gender epithets, and sexual conduct by her male coworkers. The district office also alleged that defendant's failure to take remedial action under the guise that the sexual harassment was all in fun resulted in the constructive discharge of CP, who felt compelled to resign when no effort was made to stop the harassment. In accordance with a consent decree spanning three years and three months, defendant agrees to pay to CP. SECTION DefendantSECTION will provide 4 hours of anti-discrimination training to the managers and supervisors at the Spokane facility and agrees to impose discipline upon any supervisor or manager who engages in sex discrimination. SECTION DefendantSECTION also will revise the supervisor appraisal process to include as an element the supervisor's handling of EEO issues and will include a commitment to equal employment opportunity as a qualification criterion for supervisory positions. 1 of 1 2 05 PM Summary: On August 22, 2003, the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission ( EEOC ), on behalf of a female employee, filed a lawsuit in the Eastern District Court of Washington, under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, as amended by Title I of the Civil Rights Act of 1991, against Huntwood Industries, Inc. The EEOC sought injunctive relief, compensatory damages, punitive damages, attorneys' fees, and other forms of affirmative relief claiming that the defendant subjected the plaintiff-intervenor to a sexually hostile work environment because of her sex, female, resulting in her constructive discharge. On July 21, 2004, the District Court (Judge Frederick Van Sickle) entered a consent decree where the defendant, among other things, agreed to pay the complainant

On August 22, 2003, the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission ( EEOC ), on behalf of a female employee, filed a lawsuit in the Eastern District Court of Washington, under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, as amended by Title I of the Civil Rights Act of 1991, against Huntwood Industries, Inc. The EEOC sought injunctive relief, compensatory damages, punitive damages, attorneys' fees, and other forms of affirmative relief claiming that the defendant subjected the plaintiff-intervenor to a sexually hostile work environment because of her sex, female, resulting in her constructive discharge. On July 21, 2004, the District Court (Judge Frederick Van Sickle) entered a consent decree where the defendant, among other things, agreed to pay the complainant

Using the provided source, generate a concise summary: SECTION SECTION Case SECTION 1 Document # 156 Filed Page 1 of 4 PageID # 1622 SECTION Case SECTION 1 Document # 156 Filed Page 2 of 4 PageID # 1622 SECTION Case SECTION 1 Document # 156 Filed Page 3 of 4 PageID # 1622 SECTION Case SECTION 1 Document # 156 Filed Page 4 of 4 PageID # 1622 Summary: In 2016, prisoners that had completed their sentences but remained incarcerated by the Illinois Department of Corrections filed this class action against the state in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Illinois. The plaintiffs alleged that the Illinois statutory scheme governing mandatory supervised release (MSR) for sex offenders and the requirement for offenders to have an approved “host site” in order to be released from custody violated their Eighth and Fourteenth Amendment rights. The court awarded the plaintiffs summary judgment on the Eighth and Fourteenth Amendment claims. The court entered a permanent injunction on January 15, 2020, requiring IDOC to present a plan for releasing class members from custody, and quarterly reports outlining steps that were being taken to ensure that all class members would be properly released by January 2, 2021. As of July 2020, the court's supervision of IDOC's progress is ongoing.

In 2016, prisoners that had completed their sentences but remained incarcerated by the Illinois Department of Corrections filed this class action against the state in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Illinois. The plaintiffs alleged that the Illinois statutory scheme governing mandatory supervised release (MSR) for sex offenders and the requirement for offenders to have an approved “host site” in order to be released from custody violated their Eighth and Fourteenth Amendment rights. The court awarded the plaintiffs summary judgment on the Eighth and Fourteenth Amendment claims. The court entered a permanent injunction on January 15, 2020, requiring IDOC to present a plan for releasing class members from custody, and quarterly reports outlining steps that were being taken to ensure that all class members would be properly released by January 2, 2021. As of July 2020, the court's supervision of IDOC's progress is ongoing.

Using the provided source, generate a concise summary: SECTION SA,PROTO U.S. District Court DISTRICT OF KANSAS (Wichita) CIVIL DOCKET FOR CASE # 6 Apsley et al v. Boeing Company, The et al Assigned to District Judge Eric F. Melgren Referred to Magistrate Judge Karen M. Humphreys related Cases 6 6 6 6 6 6 Case in other court 10CCA, 10CCA, 10CCA, 10CCA, 10CCA, Cause 28 1331 Fed. Question Employment Discrimination SECTION PlaintiffSECTION Date Filed Date Terminated Jury Demand Both Nature of Suit 442 Civil Rights Jobs Jurisdiction Federal Question Perry Apsley Individually and on behalf of those similarly situated represented by James E. Gore Williamson Law Firm, LLC 218 Delaware Street, Suite 207 Kansas City, MO 64105 Fax Email [email protected] LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED Lawrence W. Williamson, Jr. Williamson Law Firm, LLC 218 Delaware Street, Suite 207 Kansas City, MO 64105 Email [email protected] LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED Monique K. Centeno Centeno Law, LLC 8623 E 32nd Street N, Suite 300 Wichita, KS 67226 Fax Email TERMINATED LEAD ATTORNEY Uzo L. Ohaebosim PSUSBSID-NOMAIL Fax TERMINATED LEAD ATTORNEY SECTION PlaintiffSECTION represented by Bob Bailey Individually and on behalf of those similarly situated SECTION PlaintiffSECTION Jacob A. Bakk Individually and on behalf of those similarly situated TERMINATED SECTION PlaintiffSECTION Gary Ball Individually and on behalf of those similarly situated SECTION PlaintiffSECTION James E. Gore (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED Lawrence W. Williamson, Jr. (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED Monique K. Centeno (See above for address) TERMINATED LEAD ATTORNEY Uzo L. Ohaebosim (See above for address) TERMINATED LEAD ATTORNEY represented by James E. Gore (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED Lawrence W. Williamson, Jr. (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED Monique K. Centeno (See above for address) TERMINATED LEAD ATTORNEY Uzo L. Ohaebosim (See above for address) TERMINATED LEAD ATTORNEY represented by James E. Gore (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED Lawrence W. Williamson, Jr. (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED Monique K. Centeno (See above for address) TERMINATED LEAD ATTORNEY Uzo L. Ohaebosim (See above for address) TERMINATED LEAD ATTORNEY Peggy S. Bell Individually and on behalf of those similarly situated TERMINATED SECTION PlaintiffSECTION Thomas Belton Individually and on behalf of those similarly situated SECTION PlaintiffSECTION Melonda Bircher Individually and on behalf of those similarly situated TERMINATED SECTION PlaintiffSECTION represented by James E. Gore (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED Lawrence W. Williamson, Jr. (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED Monique K. Centeno (See above for address) TERMINATED LEAD ATTORNEY Uzo L. Ohaebosim (See above for address) TERMINATED LEAD ATTORNEY represented by James E. Gore (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED Lawrence W. Williamson, Jr. (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED Monique K. Centeno (See above for address) TERMINATED LEAD ATTORNEY Uzo L. Ohaebosim (See above for address) TERMINATED LEAD ATTORNEY represented by James E. Gore (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED Lawrence W. Williamson, Jr. (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED Monique K. Centeno (See above for address) TERMINATED LEAD ATTORNEY Uzo L. Ohaebosim (See above for address) TERMINATED LEAD ATTORNEY James Bowmaker Individually and on behalf of those similarly situated TERMINATED SECTION PlaintiffSECTION Jerry L. Bransteter Individually and on behalf of those similarly situated TERMINATED SECTION PlaintiffSECTION Michael E. Burgardt Individually and on behalf of those similarly situated TERMINATED represented by James Bowmaker 6545 Ward Parkway Wichita, KS 67217 PRO SE James E. Gore ( Summary: On December 19, 2005 a group of former employees of the Boeing Company filed suit in the United States District Court of Kansas against the Boeing Company (Boeing), Spirit Aerosystems Inc. (Spirit), the Onex Corporation (Onex) and Midwestern Aircraft (Midwestern). The plaintiffs sought declaratory, injunctive and monetary relief as well as class certification, alleging pattern or practice of age discrimination, disparate impact and disparate treatment by the defendants during the layoff and rehire process, in connection with Boeing's sale of its commercial airplane manufacturing facilities to Onex. The plaintiffs brought eight claims, two of which were dismissed during the pleading stage, five were dismissed as the District Court granted summary judgment in the defendants' favor in two separate opinions. The plaintiffs appealed to the 10th Circuit Court, but the 10th Circuit affirmed the lower court's decisions. The remaining claim in the case after the Circuit Court decision was the plaintiffs' ADEA claim of disparate treatment. A number of individual plaintiffs settled with defendants. After the plaintiffs failed to appear at a hearing on a motion to dismiss, Judge Melgran granted the motion. The plaintiffs appealed on February 9, 2015, and the appeal was dismissed on June 16, 2015 for failure to prosecute. The case is closed.

On December 19, 2005 a group of former employees of the Boeing Company filed suit in the United States District Court of Kansas against the Boeing Company (Boeing), Spirit Aerosystems Inc. (Spirit), the Onex Corporation (Onex) and Midwestern Aircraft (Midwestern). The plaintiffs sought declaratory, injunctive and monetary relief as well as class certification, alleging pattern or practice of age discrimination, disparate impact and disparate treatment by the defendants during the layoff and rehire process, in connection with Boeing's sale of its commercial airplane manufacturing facilities to Onex. The plaintiffs brought eight claims, two of which were dismissed during the pleading stage, five were dismissed as the District Court granted summary judgment in the defendants' favor in two separate opinions. The plaintiffs appealed to the 10th Circuit Court, but the 10th Circuit affirmed the lower court's decisions. The remaining claim in the case after the Circuit Court decision was the plaintiffs' ADEA claim of disparate treatment. A number of individual plaintiffs settled with defendants. After the plaintiffs failed to appear at a hearing on a motion to dismiss, Judge Melgran granted the motion. The plaintiffs appealed on February 9, 2015, and the appeal was dismissed on June 16, 2015 for failure to prosecute. The case is closed.

Using the provided source, generate a concise summary: SECTION Case 2 Document 1 Filed Page 1 of 21 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF LOUISIANA MILES MORAN, for himself and all others similarly situated, SECTION PlaintiffSECTION, v. KEVA LANDRUM-JOHNSON, Chief Judge of Orleans Parish Criminal District Court; PAUL A. BONIN, CAMILLE BURAS, DARRYL A. DERBIGNY, TRACEY FLEMINGS-DAVILLIER, KAREN K. HERMAN, ARTHUR L. HUNTER, ROBIN D. PITTMAN, DENNIS WALDRON, LAURIE A. WHITE, BENEDICT WILLARD, and FRANZ L. ZIBILICH, in their official capacity as Judges of the Orleans Parish Criminal District Court, SECTION DefendantSECTION s. Case No. (Class Action) CLASS ACTION COMPLAINT 1. SECTION DefendantSECTION s, the Judges of the Orleans Parish Criminal District Court, are responsible for setting conditions of release for people who are arrested and charged with certain crimes in Orleans Parish. SECTION DefendantSECTION s consistently and unlawfully impose secured financial conditions of release in an amount that individuals cannot afford, without any inquiry into or findings concerning their ability to pay or alternatives to incarceration. As a result, the moneybased orders of post-arrest release that they impose constitute de facto orders of pretrial detention for those unable to pay — orders that are issued without the legal and factual findings and procedures required for a valid order of pretrial detention. See Caliste v. Cantrell, 329 F. Supp. 3d 296, 308–15 (E.D. La. 2018). Case 2 Document 1 Filed Page 2 of 21 2. SECTION DefendantSECTION s have an institutional financial conflict of interest in every secured money bond that they impose because they act both as supposedly neutral judicial officers and as executives responsible for managing the funds generated by each bail order that they set. Louisiana law provides that if (and only if) an arrestee uses a commercial surety to secure pretrial release, the judges of the Orleans Parish Criminal District Court (“OPCDC”) receive 1.8% of the amount of that bond into the court’s Judicial Expense Fund,1 which SECTION DefendantSECTION Judges control. 3. These policies and practices result in imminent and ongoing violations of fundamental rights. SECTION PlaintiffSECTION, on behalf of himself and a class of similarly situated arrestees, seeks a declaration that SECTION DefendantSECTION s’ conduct violates the Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution. Jurisdiction and Venue 4. This is a civil rights action arising under 42 U.S.C. § 1983, 28 U.S.C. §§ 2201– 02, and the Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution. This Court has jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §§ 1331 and 1343. 5. Venue in this Court is proper pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1391. Parties 6. SECTION PlaintiffSECTION Miles B. Moran is a pretrial detainee in the custody of Orleans Parish Sheriff Marlin Gusman. He is currently detained at the Orleans Justice Center, 2800 Perdido Street, New Orleans, LA 70119. The Orleans Parish Magistrate has conditioned Mr. Moran’s release on payment of a secured money bail that Mr. Moran cannot afford. Pursuant to standard 1 The Judicial Expense Fund is also referred to by the Orleans Parish Criminal District Court as the “General Fund.” 2 Case 2 Document 1 Filed Page 3 of 21 court assignment practices applicable to all class members, if the District Attorney accepts the charges against Mr. Moran, his case will be allotted to an as yet unknown section of the court, where one of the SECTION DefendantSECTION Judges will have the authority to determine his conditions of release. The cases of class members are randomly assigned to court sections over which each of the SECTION DefendantSECTION Judges preside. 7. SECTION DefendantSECTION Keva Landrum-Johnson is the Chief Judge of the OPCDC and presides over Section E. Judge Landrum-Johnson has authority to impose financial conditions of release in cases that are allotted to her section. She has control over the Judicial Expense Fund and relies upon its income to fund the operat Summary: A class-action lawsuit sought declaratory judgment against twelve Louisiana judges, alleging that the judges violated Plaintiffs' Due Process and Equal Protection rights by imposing bail without determining whether arrestees could pay. The complaint also alleged an improper financial incentive for judges to impose bail in order to receive a portion of the money for their general expense fund.

A class-action lawsuit sought declaratory judgment against twelve Louisiana judges, alleging that the judges violated Plaintiffs' Due Process and Equal Protection rights by imposing bail without determining whether arrestees could pay. The complaint also alleged an improper financial incentive for judges to impose bail in order to receive a portion of the money for their general expense fund.

Using the provided source, generate a concise summary: SECTION SECTION Case SECTION 2 As of 04 12 PM PDT 1 of 5 CIVIL,CLOSED U.S. District Court Eastern District of California - Live System (Sacramento) CIVIL DOCKET FOR CASE # 2 Equal Employment Opportunity Commission v. Paragary's Management Group, et al. Assigned to Chief Judge Morrison C. England, Jr Referred to Magistrate Judge Dale A. Drozd Cause 28 451 Employment Discrimination SECTION PlaintiffSECTION Date Filed Date Terminated Jury Demand SECTION PlaintiffSECTION Nature of Suit 442 Civil Rights Jobs Jurisdiction U.S. Government SECTION PlaintiffSECTION Equal Employment Opportunity Commission represented by Cindy S. O'Hara Equal Employment Opportunity Commission Phillip Burton Federal Building, 5 West 450 Golden Gate Avenue, POB 36025 San Francisco, CA 94102 (415) Fax (415) Email [email protected] LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED David Forgan Offen-Brown U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission Phillip Burton Federal Building, 5 West 450 Golden Gate Avenue, POB 36025 San Francisco, CA 94102 (415) Fax (415) Email [email protected] LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED Evangelina Patricia Hernandez U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission 350 The Embarcadero Ste 500 San Francisco, CA 94105 (415) Fax (415) Email [email protected] LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED Elizabeth Esparza-Cervantes US Equal Employment Opportunity Commission 350 The Embarcadero Suite 500 San Francisco, CA 94105 (415) Fax (415) Email [email protected] TERMINATED V. SECTION DefendantSECTION SECTION Case SECTION 2 As of 04 12 PM PDT 2 of 5 Paragary's Management Group, et al. Doing business as Paragary's Bar and Oven Doing business as Blue Clue Doing business as Cafe Bernardo Doing business as Centro Cocina Doing business as Esquire Grill Doing business as KBar Doing business as Monkey Bar Doing business as Spataro SECTION DefendantSECTION Paramoor, Inc Paragary's Bar and Oven Doing business as Paragary's Management Group Doing business as Blue Clue Doing business as Cafe Bernardo Doing business as Centro Cocina Doing business as Esquire Grill Doing business as KBar Doing business as Monkey Bar Doing business as Spataro represented by Alden John Parker Fisher & Phillips, LLP 621 Capitol Mall Suite 1400 Sacramento, CA 95814 (916) Fax (916) Email [email protected] LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED Michael J. Christian Jackson Lewis P.C. 400 Capitol Mall Sacramento, CA 95814 Fax Email [email protected] TERMINATED SECTION DefendantSECTION PDK Partnership SECTION DefendantSECTION PK Partnership Date Filed # Docket Text 1 COMPLAINT against Paragary's Management Group, et al., filed by Equal Employment Opportunity Commission. (Attachments # 1 Civil Cover Sheet)(Offen-Brown, David) No filing fee required - Govt pltf. Modified on (Sherman, T). (Entered 2 SUMMONS ISSUED as to *Paragary's Management Group, et al.* with answer to complaint due within *20* days. Attorney *David Forgan Offen-Brown* *US Equal Employment Opportunity Commission* *350 The Embarcadero, Suite 500* *San Francisco, CA (Sherman, T) (Entered 3 CIVIL NEW CASE DOCUMENTS ISSUED; Initial Scheduling Conference set for at 3 30 PM in Courtroom 4 (LKK) before Senior Judge Lawrence K. Karlton. (Attachments # 1 Consent Forms # 2 VDRP Forms) (Sherman, T) (Entered SECTION Case SECTION 2 As of 04 12 PM PDT 3 of 5 4 SUMMONS ISSUED as to *Paramoor, Inc, PDK Partnership* with answer to complaint due within *20* days. Attorney *William R. Tamayo* *US Equal Employment Opportunity Commission* *350 The Embarcadero, Suite 500* *San Francisco, CA (Sherman, T) (Entered 5 First AMENDED COMPLAINT against PK Partnership, Paramoor, Inc, PDK Partnership, Paragary's Management Group, et al., filed by Equal Employment Opportunity Commission.(Esparza-Cervantes, Elizabeth) (Entered 6 CIVIL COVER SHEET by Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (Esparza-Cervantes, Elizabeth) (Entered 7 DECLINE to PROCEED BEFORE US MAGISTRATE JUDGE by Equal Employment Opportunity Commission. (Esparza-Cervantes, Elizabeth) (Entered 8 STIPULATION and PROPOSED ORDER STATUS (PRETRIAL SCHEDULING) CONFERENCE REPORT by Equal Employment Opportunity Commission. (Esparza-Cervantes, Elizabeth) (Entered 9 SUMMONS ISSUED as to *PK Partnership* with answer to complaint due within *20* days. Attorney *Elizabeth Esparza-Cervantes* *US Equal Employment Opportunity Commission* *350 The Embarcadero, Ste 500* *San Francisco, CA (Duong, D) (Entered 10 SUMMONS RETURNED EXECUTED by Equal Employment Opportunity Commission. Paramoor, Inc served on answer due (Esparza-Cervantes, Elizabeth) (Entered 11 SUMMONS RETURNED EXECUTED by Equal Employment Opportunity Commission. (Attachments # 1New Case Opening Documents)(Esparza-Cervantes, Elizabeth) Modified on (Duong, D). (Entered 12 CERTIFICATE of SERVICE by Equal Employment Opportunity Commission re 3 Civil New Case Documents for LKK, 4 Summons, 1 Complaint, Notice and Acknowledgment of Receipt (Esparza-Cervantes, Elizabeth) Modified on (Duong, D). (Entered 13 CERTIFICATE of SERVICE by Equal Employment Opportunity Commission re 2 Summons, 3 Civil New Case Documents for LKK, 1 Complaint, and Notice and Acknowledgment of Receipt (Attachments # 1 Notice and Acknowledgment of Receipt (California Service Waiver), used Per Fed. R. Civ. P. 4 (h) Elizabeth) (Entered 14 ORDER of RECUSAL Judge Lawrence K. Karlton recused himself and the case is now reassigned to Judge Frank C. Damrell, Jr for all further proceedings. Signed by Judge Lawrence K. Karlton on (Duong, D) (Entered 15 CIVIL NEW CASE DOCUMENTS ISSUED; (Attachments # 1 VDRP Forms) (Duong, D) (Entered 16 ANSWER to COMPLAINT by Paramoor, Inc.(Parker, Alden) (Entered 17 ORDER of RECUSAL. Judge Frank C. Damrell, Jr recuses as the judge to whom this case is assigned. Case reassigned to Judge Morrison C. England, Jr for all further proceedings signed by Judge David F. Levi on (Reader, L) (Entered 18 CIVIL SCHEDULING ORDR DOCUMENTS ISSUED for MCE; (Reader, L) (Entered 19 STIPULATION Substitution of Attorney by Paramoor, Inc. (Christian, Michael) (Entered 20 PROPOSED ORDER Substitution of Attorney re 19 Stipulation by Paramoor, Inc. (Christian, Michael) (Entered 21 ORDER signed by Judge Morrison C. England Jr. on 5/3/06 GRANTING Substitution of Attorney. Basham Parker LLP added and Jackson Lewis LLP terminated as attorney of record for SECTION DefendantSECTION Paramoor Inc. (Donati, J) (Entered SECTION Case SECTION 2 As of 04 12 PM PDT 4 of 5 22 NOTICE of Unavailability of Counsel for SECTION PlaintiffSECTION EEOC. (Esparza-Cervantes, Elizabeth) Modified on (Krueger, M). (Entered 23 NOTICE of CHANGE of ADDRESS by Alden John Parker. (Parker, Alden) (Entered 24 NOTICE of APPEARANCE by Evangelina Patricia Hernandez on behalf of Equal Employment Opportunity Commission. Attorney Hernandez, Evangelina Patricia added. (Hernandez, Evangelina) (Entered 25 MINUTE ORDER (Text Only) A review of the docket shows that there has been no activity in this case since A Status Conference is SET for at 9 00 AM in Courtroom 7. A Joint Status Report shall be filed on or before with all parties participating. SECTION PlaintiffSECTION shall serve a copy of this minute order on any defendant(s) who has not yet appeared. The parties are reminded that failure to file a Joint Status Report timely may result in the imposition of sanctions, an order to show cause, and/or dismissal of the action. Signed by Judge Morrison C. England, Jr on C) (Entered 26 JOINT STATUS (PRETRIAL SCHEDULING) CONFERENCE REPORT by Equal Employment Opportunity Commission. Attorney O'Hara, Cindy S added. (O'Hara, Cindy) Modified on (Marciel, M). (Entered 27 ORDER signed by Judge Morrison C. England, Jr on ORDERING the Scheduling Conference reset for at 09 00 a.m. in Courtroom 7 (MCE) before Judge Morrison C. England Jr. (Becknal, R) (Entered 28 STIPULATION and PROPOSED ORDER for continue status conference by Equal Employment Opportunity Commission. (O'Hara, Cindy) (Entered 29 STIPULATION and ORDER signed by Judge Morrison C. England, Jr on 2/4/09 Status Conference RESET for at 02 00 PM in Courtroom 7 (MCE) before Judge Morrison C. England Jr.. (Kaminski, H) (Entered 30 PLAINTIFF(S) STATUS REPORT by Equal Employment Opportunity Commission. (O'Hara, Cindy) (Entered 31 MINUTE ORDER (Text Only) On the Court's own motion and pursuant to Local Rule the Status Conference, scheduled for hearing on is submitted without oral argument. The hearing date of is vacated. If the Court determines that oral argument is needed, it will be scheduled at a later date.Signed by Judge Morrison C. England, Jr. on (Deutsch, S) (Entered 32 DEFENDANT(S) STATUS REPORT by Paramoor, Inc. (Parker, Alden) (Entered 33 MINUTE ORDER (Text Only) The Status Conference is reset for hearing on at 2 00 p.m. in Courtroom 7. Signed by Judge Morrison C. England, Jr. on (Deutsch, S) (Entered 34 MINUTE ORDER (Text Only) The status conference, scheduled for hearing on is VACATED. If the Court determines that a status conference is needed, it will be scheduled at a later date. (Schultz, C) (Entered 35 ORDER RE SETTLEMENT AND DISPOSITION signed by Judge Morrison C. England, Jr on ORDERING that pursuant to the representations of the attorney forSECTION DefendantSECTION s, the Court has determined that this case is settled; In accordance with the provisions of Local Rule dispositional documents are to be filed on or before Failure to comply with this Order may be grounds for the imposition of sanctions on any and all counsel as well as any party or parties who cause non-compliance with this Order. (Becknal, R) (Entered 36 STIPULATION and PROPOSED ORDER for Consent Decree by Equal Employment Opportunity Commission. (O'Hara, Cindy) (Entered 37 CONSENT DECREE signed by Judge Morrison C. England, Jr on It is hereby ORDERED, ADJUDGED and DECREED that this Court has jurdisction over the subject matter and the parties to this action. This Court retains jurisdiction over this Consent Decree during its term. This Consent Decree constitutes a full and final SECTION Case SECTION 2 As of 04 12 PM PDT 5 of 5 resolution of the Commission's claims against all named dfts in this action. The Commission and Paramoor will each bear its own costs and atty's fees in this action.(Kastilahn, A) (Entered Summary: On September 29, 2005 the San Francisco District Office of the EEOC filed this lawsuit in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of California. The plaintiff sued Paragary's Management Group, Paramoor, Inc., and PDK Partnership under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. The EEOC represented claimants who alleged the defendants had subjected them to a hostile work environment and disparate treatment. On April 29, 2009 Judge Morrison C. England approved and ordered a consent decree to be in effect for three years. The decree granted permanent injunctive relief and in monetary damages. There is nothing more in the docket, so presumably the matter ended in 2012.

On September 29, 2005 the San Francisco District Office of the EEOC filed this lawsuit in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of California. The plaintiff sued Paragary's Management Group, Paramoor, Inc., and PDK Partnership under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. The EEOC represented claimants who alleged the defendants had subjected them to a hostile work environment and disparate treatment. On April 29, 2009 Judge Morrison C. England approved and ordered a consent decree to be in effect for three years. The decree granted permanent injunctive relief and in monetary damages. There is nothing more in the docket, so presumably the matter ended in 2012.

Using the provided source, generate a concise summary: SECTION Case 1 Document 58 Filed Page 1 of 7 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT WESTERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK R.A-G. by her parent, R.B., individually and on behalf of all others (parents and students) similarly situated SECTION PlaintiffSECTION s -against- BUFFALO CITY SCHOOL DISTRICT BOARD OF EDUCATION and PAMELA C. BROWN, Superintendent SECTION DefendantSECTION s STIPULATION AND ORDER OF SETTLEMENT Civil Action No. WHEREAS, plaintiffs commenced the instant lawsuit on October 13, 2012, in the United States District Court for the Western District of New York, Docket No. 12 CV 0960, alleging that defendants violated the Individual with Disabilities Education Improvement Act ( IDEIA), 20 U.S.C. §1400 et.seq., by depriving the class of a Free and Appropriate Public Education (FAPE); and WHEREAS, plaintiffs further allege that the defendants violated the IDEIA by failing to provide members of the class timely and prompt related services, such as speech and language therapy, and by failing to afford members of the class individualized determinations and meaningful participation in the educational decision making process; and Case 1 Document 58 Filed Page 2 of 7 WHEREAS, defendants Pamela C. Brown, in her official capacity as Superintendent of the Buffalo City School District, and the Buffalo City School District Board of Education (BOE SECTION DefendantSECTION s) deny each and every allegation contained in the complaint; and WHEREAS, on November 2, 2012 SECTION PlaintiffSECTION s filed a Notice of Motion and Motion for Class Certification in connection with the aforementioned Complaint and SECTION DefendantSECTION s thereafter filed a Cross-Motion to either stay resolution of the issue of class certification pending SECTION DefendantSECTION s making a future dispositive motion to dismiss the lawsuit on the merits, or to deny class certification, and on June 30, 2013 the Honorable William M. Skretny granted SECTION PlaintiffSECTION s' Motion for Class Certification and denied SECTION DefendantSECTION s' Cross-Motion after considering and rejecting SECTION DefendantSECTION s' anticipated future dispositive arguments on the merits; and WHEREAS, on July 3, 2013, SECTION DefendantSECTION s appealed the decision to the United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit granting class certification, and on June 17, 2014 the Court of Appeals affirmed the order of ruling of the District Court; and WHEREAS, no finding regarding the presence or absence of liability or wrongdoing has been made; and WHEREAS, the SECTION PlaintiffSECTION s and the BOE SECTION DefendantSECTION s desire to resolve the issues raised in this litigation, without further proceedings and without either admitting or conceding the presence or absence of any fault or liability; NOW, THEREFORE, IT IS HEREBY STIPULATED AND AGREED, by and between the undersigned as follows Case 1 Document 58 Filed Page 3 of 7 1. Upon the full execution of this agreement and its being ordered by the Court,any practice, custom, policy, or procedure indicating that speech and language services shall commence no later than a school district designated point in time (e.g., two weeks after the start of the school year) shall be deemed null and void. The commencement date for speech and language services will be made by the Committee on Special Education (CSE) based on the individual assessments and data regarding each child, and specifically based on the child's needs. If the CSE recommends individual speech and language therapy for a child, then the presumption will be that those individual speech and language therapy services will commence at the start of the school year. In regard to group speech and language therapy, the parties agree that services will commence no later than two weeks after the start of each school year. 2. To ensure compliance with paragraph (1), the firm of Goldstein, Ackerhalt, and Pletcher LLP shall conduct monitoring during the and school years. a. The school year will be the implementation year of this settlement order, and the school year will be the enforcement year of this settlement order. b. Monitoring will not be conducted beyond the school year unless mutually agreed to in writing by the parties, or unless ordered by the impartial third-party Arbitrator provided for hereafter in 2g. c. The District shall compensate Goldstein, Ackerhalt, and Pletcher LLP up to ten thousand dollars per year for monitoring. The BOE Case 1 Document 58 Filed Page 4 of 7 defendant will execute payment within sixty (60) business days of receipt of detailed invoices from Goldstein, Ackerhalt, and Pletcher LLP. The BOE defendant reserves the right to challenge the reasonableness of the invoices, but shall pay the uncontested amount within the sixty (60) business days after submission of an invoice for the uncontested amount. Submission of such replacement invoice shall not impair SECTION PlaintiffSECTION s' pursuit of the contested fees through the arbitration process set forth hereafter in 2g. d. By January 15 of each monitoring year, the BOE defendant agrees to provide a document to assist with monitoring. The document will include a unique identification number of every student in the Buffalo City School District recommended to receive group and individual speech and language therapy, and for each student the nature (group and/or individual) ofthe services, the commencement date for such services as noted on the student's IEP, and the date services actually commenced. e. Upon receipt of the document described in paragraph 2(d) and before February 15 of each monitoring year, Goldstein, Ackerhalt, and Pletcher LLP will request reasonable and appropriate documentation related to the provision of speech and language therapy services for all relevant students who receive individual services and no less than 20 and no more than 100 students mandated to receive group speech and language therapy. f. On or before April 15 of each monitoring year, the BOE SECTION DefendantSECTION will provide Goldstein, Ackerhalt, and Pletcher with the documentation Case 1 Document 58 Filed Page 5 of 7 / requested pursuant to paragraph 2(e). The BOE SECTION DefendantSECTION s reserve the right to challenge the reasonableness of the documentation requested pursuant to paragraph 2(e), and must notify Goldstein, Ackerhalt, and Pletcher LLP of its specific disagreement with the request by March 7 of each monitoring year. g. Any and all disputes between the parties related to the implementation and/or interpretation of this Settlement Agreement and Order, including, but not limited to documentation requested and/or provided; fee disputes; and compliance under number 1 above shall be determined by an impartial third-party Arbitrator. The parties shall agree upon an Arbitrator from the Western District ofNew York Mediator list within fifteen (15) days from receipt of written notice to utilize the arbitration process If they are unable to so agree within fifteen (15) days, they shall select an Arbitrator from the Western District ofNew York Mediator list via a random selection process. l.The Arbitrator shall establish timelines (not to exceed sixty (60) calendar days) to receive written statements and/or oral arguments from the parties and may request evidence in documentary or evidentiary form if the Arbitrator determines it is needed. 2.The Arbitrator shall issue a decision on the dispute within thirty (30) days after receiving the parties' fmal submissions unless an extension of this time is mutually agreed to by the parties. The parties agree that the decision of the Arbitrator shall be final. Case 1 Document 58 Filed Page 6 of 7 3.If the Arbitrator rules in favor of the SECTION PlaintiffSECTION s, the Arbitrator shall have the authority to issue orders to the same extent as that of a court. 4.If compliance with this Settlement Agreement and Order is in. dispute, and if the Arbitrator determines that the BOE is not in compliance, the Arbitrator shall order appropriate corrective action including, but not limited to, further monitoring. 5.If SECTION PlaintiffSECTION s are the prevailing party on an issue before the Arbitrator, Goldstein, Ackerhalt & Pletcher, LLP will be entitled to reasonable attorneys'fees related thereto. The reasonableness of said fees shall be governed, to the extent feasible, by the attorney fee-shifting provisions of the IDEIA. for a dispute regarding compliance under number 1 above, all costs of arbitration shall be borne by SECTION DefendantSECTION BOE. For any dispute regarding compliance as defined by number 1 above, the parties shall each bear half the cost of arbitration. 7.In the event a party fails to abide by a determination of the Arbitrator, the opposing party shall have the right to initiate and pursue an action in Federal Court to enforce said determination. 3. Within 90 business days from the execution of this agreement and the Court signing and granting this Order, BOE SECTION DefendantSECTION shall send written correspondence to all members of the class informing them of the nature of the Complaint and the stipulation contained in paragraph (1) above. The written Case 1 Document 58 Filed Page 7 of 7 correspondence to be sent by the SECTION DefendantSECTION is incorporated into this agreement as Attachment A. 4. BOE defendant shall provide the individual SECTION PlaintiffSECTION, R.A-G, with 10 hours of compensatory speech and language therapy services. The BOE defendant shall implement such services within (1 0) days of the receipt of the R.B.'s request for such services at a time and place agreed upon by the Parent and the District. Such services must be requested and utilized before June 1, 2016 or they will be forfeit. 5. Attorneys' fees in the amount of One Hundred and Sixty Five Thousand Dollars shall be paid by the Buffalo Public Schools to Goldstein, Ackerhalt & Pletcher, LLP within a reasonable period of time not to exceed sixty (60) business days, in full satisfaction of all claims for fees under this litigation up until granting of this Order. 6. Upon execution of this agreement, and it being ordered by the Court, this action w-it+h- p'or~eJ-. u d''-ic_e_. ; ;; e; w ;dra- mits en-tir_e_ty_, _ _ _- - - t r - - - - - - Jamoo Sampson R.B. Bo>Irrd~t ~ Donald Ogilvie, Interim Superintendent 1lham M. Skretny, Judge United States District Court Summary: In 2012, a parent, individually and on behalf of their student-child with an educational disability in the Buffalo City School District, filed this class action complaint in the the U.S. District Court for the Western District of New York. The plaintiffs alleged that the Buffalo City School District Board of Education and its superintendent denied free appropriate public education to children with educational disabilities, failed to promptly provide children with disabilities related services, and failed to provide parents with meaningful participation in their children's educational decision-making process. In 2015, the parties reached a settlement that required more timely speech and language therapy for members of the class and awarded attorneys' fees. The case closed in March 2015.

In 2012, a parent, individually and on behalf of their student-child with an educational disability in the Buffalo City School District, filed this class action complaint in the the U.S. District Court for the Western District of New York. The plaintiffs alleged that the Buffalo City School District Board of Education and its superintendent denied free appropriate public education to children with educational disabilities, failed to promptly provide children with disabilities related services, and failed to provide parents with meaningful participation in their children's educational decision-making process. In 2015, the parties reached a settlement that required more timely speech and language therapy for members of the class and awarded attorneys' fees. The case closed in March 2015.

Using the provided source, generate a concise summary: SECTION SECTION Case SECTION 2 As of 10 12 AM PST 1 of 16 PRISONER_CIVIL_RIGHTS,CLOSED U.S. District Court Eastern District of California - Live System (Sacramento) CIVIL DOCKET FOR CASE # 2 (PC) Johnson, et al., v. Shaffer Assigned to Chief District Judge Kimberly J. Mueller Referred to Magistrate Judge Allison Claire Demand $0 Cause 42 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights SECTION PlaintiffSECTION Date Filed Date Terminated Jury Demand None Nature of Suit 550 Prisoner Civil Rights Jurisdiction Federal Question Sam Johnson on behalf of himself and all others similarly situated represented by Keith Allen Wattley UnCommon Law 220 4th Street Suite 103 Oakland, CA 94607 Fax Email [email protected] LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED V. SECTION DefendantSECTION Jennifer Shaffer represented by Heather M. Heckler Office Of The Attorney General Department of Justice 1300 I Street Sacramento, CA 95814 Fax Email [email protected] LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED Jessica Nicole Blonien Attorney General's Office of the State of California P.O. Box 944255 1300 I Street Suite 125 Sacramento, CA Fax Email [email protected] LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED Christopher John Rench Office of the Attorney General 1300 I Street Sacramento, CA 95814 Fax Email [email protected] TERMINATED Megan R. O'Carroll Attorney General's Office of the State of SECTION Case SECTION 2 As of 10 12 AM PST 2 of 16 California Correctional Law Section P.O. Box 944255 1300 I Street Suite 125 Sacramento, CA (916) Fax (916) Email [email protected] TERMINATED Michael Gregory Lee Department Of Justice 1300 I Street, Suite 125 P.O. Box 944255 Sacramento, CA 94244 Fax Email [email protected] TERMINATED SECTION DefendantSECTION Matthew Cate TERMINATED represented by Heather M. Heckler (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED Jessica Nicole Blonien (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED Christopher John Rench (See above for address) TERMINATED Megan R. O'Carroll (See above for address) TERMINATED Michael Gregory Lee (See above for address) TERMINATED SECTION DefendantSECTION Edmund G. Brown, Jr. TERMINATED represented by Heather M. Heckler (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED Jessica Nicole Blonien (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED Christopher John Rench (See above for address) TERMINATED Megan R. O'Carroll (See above for address) TERMINATED Michael Gregory Lee SECTION Case SECTION 2 As of 10 12 AM PST 3 of 16 (See above for address) TERMINATED SECTION DefendantSECTION Cliff Kusaj Ph. D., Chief Psychologist TERMINATED represented by Heather M. Heckler (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED Jessica Nicole Blonien (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED Christopher John Rench (See above for address) TERMINATED Megan R. O'Carroll (See above for address) TERMINATED Michael Gregory Lee (See above for address) TERMINATED SECTION DefendantSECTION Richard Hayward Staff Psychologist TERMINATED represented by Heather M. Heckler (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED Jessica Nicole Blonien (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED Christopher John Rench (See above for address) TERMINATED Megan R. O'Carroll (See above for address) TERMINATED Michael Gregory Lee (See above for address) TERMINATED SECTION DefendantSECTION Thomas Powers Commissioner TERMINATED represented by Heather M. Heckler (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED Jessica Nicole Blonien (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED Christopher John Rench (See above for address) TERMINATED SECTION Case SECTION 2 As of 10 12 AM PST 4 of 16 SECTION DefendantSECTION Al Fulbright Deputy Commissioner TERMINATED Megan R. O'Carroll (See above for address) TERMINATED Michael Gregory Lee (See above for address) TERMINATED represented by Heather M. Heckler (See above for addres Summary: This civil rights class action was filed in 2012 in the Eastern District of California; it alleged due process violations when the state arbitrarily denied parole to nearly all lifers who had served their minimum sentence. On October 2, 2015, the parties entered into an agreement by which the defendants agreed to make changes to the psychological risk assessment processes used by the parole board. The Court approved the settlement in May 2016, and retained jurisdiction over the case until January 1, 2017, with the plaintiffs' able to get an extension of the Court's jurisdiction if the defendants fail to abide by the agreed upon terms. In February of 2019, the court issued an order stating that the defendants had complied with the order. The case is now closed.

This civil rights class action was filed in 2012 in the Eastern District of California; it alleged due process violations when the state arbitrarily denied parole to nearly all lifers who had served their minimum sentence. On October 2, 2015, the parties entered into an agreement by which the defendants agreed to make changes to the psychological risk assessment processes used by the parole board. The Court approved the settlement in May 2016, and retained jurisdiction over the case until January 1, 2017, with the plaintiffs' able to get an extension of the Court's jurisdiction if the defendants fail to abide by the agreed upon terms. In February of 2019, the court issued an order stating that the defendants had complied with the order. The case is now closed.

Using the provided source, generate a concise summary: SECTION SECTION Case SECTION 8 As of 11 01 PM EDT 1 of 23 CLOSED,JURY,LC 2 U.S. District Court District of South Carolina (Anderson/Greenwood) CIVIL DOCKET FOR CASE # 8 Doe v. Haley et al Assigned to Honorable G Ross Anderson, Jr Cause 42 1983 Civil Rights Act SECTION PlaintiffSECTION John Doe minor child, by and through his Guardian ad Litem Jane Doe Date Filed Date Terminated Jury Demand Both Nature of Suit 440 Civil Rights Other Jurisdiction Federal Question represented by Robert J Butcher Camden Law Firm PO Box 610 Camden, SC 29021 Email [email protected] LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED Thomas E Hite, Jr Hite and Pruitt PO Box 805 Abbeville, SC 29620 Fax Email [email protected] LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED Aaron Hirsh Finch Children's Rights 330 7th Avenue 4th Floor New York, NY 10001 Fax Email [email protected] PRO HAC VICE ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED Heather Hite Stone Hite and Stone PO Box 805 Abbeville, SC 29620 Email [email protected] ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED Ira P Lustbader Children's Rights 330 7th Avenue 4th Floor New York, NY 10001 Fax Email [email protected] PRO HAC VICE ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED Kathryn Anne Wood Children's Rights SECTION Case SECTION 8 As of 11 01 PM EDT 2 of 23 V. SECTION DefendantSECTION Nikki Haley TERMINATED 330 7th Avenue 4th Floor New York, NY 10001 Fax Email [email protected] PRO HAC VICE ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED Laurence Drew Borten Children's Rights 330 7th Avenue 4th Floor New York, NY 10001 Fax Email [email protected] TERMINATED PRO HAC VICE ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED Marcia Robinson Lowry Children's Rights 330 7th Avenue 4th Floor New York, NY 10001 Fax Email [email protected] PRO HAC VICE ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED Sarah Teresa Russo Children's Rights 330 7th Avenue 4th Floor New York, NY 10001 Fax Email [email protected] PRO HAC VICE ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED represented by Joel Steve Hughes Davidson and Lindemann PO Box 8568 Columbia, SC Email [email protected] LEAD ATTORNEY Kenneth Paul Woodington Davidson Morrison and Lindemann PO Box 8568 Columbia, SC Fax Email [email protected] LEAD ATTORNEY William Henry Davidson, II SECTION Case SECTION 8 As of 11 01 PM EDT 3 of 23 SECTION DefendantSECTION Department of Social Services SECTION DefendantSECTION Lillian Koller TERMINATED SECTION DefendantSECTION Kathleen Hayes TERMINATED Davidson and Lindemann PO Box 8568 Columbia, SC Fax Email [email protected] LEAD ATTORNEY represented by James William Logan, Jr Logan Jolly and Smith PO Box 259 Anderson, SC 29621 Fax Email [email protected] LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED Michael Todd Smith Logan Jolly and Smith PO Box 259 Anderson, SC 29621 Email [email protected] ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED represented by Joel Steve Hughes (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY William Henry Davidson, II (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY represented by Damon C Wlodarczyk Riley Pope and Laney PO Box 11412 Columbia, SC 29211 Fax Email [email protected] LEAD ATTORNEY Roy F Laney Riley Pope and Laney PO Box 11412 Columbia, SC 29211 Fax Email [email protected] LEAD ATTORNEY Thomas Lowndes Pope Riley Pope and Laney PO Box 11412 Columbia, SC 29211 Fax Email [email protected] LEAD ATTORNEY SECTION Case SECTION 8 As of 11 01 PM EDT 4 of 23 SECTION DefendantSECTION Isabel Blanco TERMINATED SECTION DefendantSECTION Robin Kubler TERMINATED SECTION DefendantSECTION Merry Eve Poole SECTION DefendantSECTION Ursula Best SECTION DefendantSECTION Cassandra Daniels SECTION DefendantSECTION Patricia Boswell TERMINATED represented by Joel Steve Hughes (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY William Henry Davidson, II (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY represented by James William Logan, Jr (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY Michael Todd Smith (See above for address) represented by James William Logan, Jr (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED Michael Todd Smith (See above for address) ATTORNEY TO BE NO Summary: On May 30, 2013, an eleven-year-old child in the custody of the South Carolina Department of Social Services (SCDSS), filed a lawsuit in the Court of Common Pleas, Abbeville County, South Carolina, against SCDSS and the Boys Home of the South (BHOTS), alleging that, as a result of Defendants' failures, Plaintiff was sexually assaulted on multiple occasions, causing him severe and permanent mental injury. Following removal to Federal Court, in early 2014, Plaintiff settled with both SCDSS and BHOTS for an undisclosed sum of money. BHOTS also permanently closed as a result of the lawsuit.

On May 30, 2013, an eleven-year-old child in the custody of the South Carolina Department of Social Services (SCDSS), filed a lawsuit in the Court of Common Pleas, Abbeville County, South Carolina, against SCDSS and the Boys Home of the South (BHOTS), alleging that, as a result of Defendants' failures, Plaintiff was sexually assaulted on multiple occasions, causing him severe and permanent mental injury. Following removal to Federal Court, in early 2014, Plaintiff settled with both SCDSS and BHOTS for an undisclosed sum of money. BHOTS also permanently closed as a result of the lawsuit.

Using the provided source, generate a concise summary: SECTION Case 1 Document 1 Filed Page 1 of 31 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK SARA COLEMAN, as Personal Representative of the ESTATE OF THEODORE COLEMAN, JON MCCOLLUM, and ROLAND STEPHENS, individually and on behalf of a class of all others similarly situated, Named SECTION PlaintiffSECTION s, -against- THE CITY OF NEW YORK, NEW YORK CITY POLICE DEPARTMENT (“NYPD”) DEPUTY COMMISSIONER DAVID COHEN, and NYPD ASSISTANT CHIEF THOMAS GALATI, SECTION DefendantSECTION s. CLASS ACTION COMPLAINT JURY DEMAND Sara Coleman, as Personal Representative of the Estate of Theodore Coleman, Jon McCollum, and Roland Stephens (collectively, “Named SECTION PlaintiffSECTION s”) individually and on behalf of a class of all others similarly situated, for their Complaint against SECTION DefendantSECTION s City of New York, NYPD Deputy Commissioner David Cohen, and NYPD Assistant Chief Thomas Galati (collectively, “SECTION DefendantSECTION s”), allege as follows INTRODUCTION 1. This class action seeks to vindicate the rights of the many AfricanAmerican detectives in the NYPD’s Intelligence whose promotions were denied or delayed solely based on race. For well over a decade, the NYPD’s Intelligence Division has implemented a secretive and unstructured promotions policy, administered by white supervisors 1 In 2013, the Intelligence Division changed its name to the Intelligence Bureau. For ease of reference, the Bureau will be referred to throughout this complaint as “Intelligence Division.” Case 1 Document 1 Filed Page 2 of 31 who refuse to promote deserving African-Americans detectives. As a result of these policies, Named SECTION PlaintiffSECTION s and other African-American detectives have been repeatedly denied welldeserved promotions—even when recommended by their direct supervisors—without explanation, while less qualified white detectives have been promoted above them. 2. Detectives Theodore Coleman, Jon McCollum and Roland Stephens were each highly experienced African-American detectives, who devoted over twenty years of their careers to law enforcement. Over the course of their careers in the NYPD, they were each repeatedly commended for their investigative successes, leadership, professionalism, and devotion to achieving the finest results. 3. In 2001, all three of them joined the NYPD’s elite Intelligence Division, which is tasked with preventing and investigating terrorism and other major crimes. On September 11, 2001, they risked their lives to rescue those in the towers and to maintain security. Following the attacks, they assisted with the cleanup and investigation, interviewing hundreds of suspected terrorists and following up on innumerable leads. They dedicated their careers to keeping New Yorkers safe. 4. In spite of their proven track records of achievement and strong recommendations from their direct supervisors, they were repeatedly passed up for promotion due to their race. More than one supervisor who recommended them said that if they had been white then they would have been promoted. Other supervisors were at a loss to explain why they were not promoted. 5. Other African-Americans detectives in the Intelligence Division have faced a similar fate. There is a stark disparity in the percent of African Americans in the Intelligence Division, as opposed to the police force in general. When Named SECTION PlaintiffSECTION s filed 2 Case 1 Document 1 Filed Page 3 of 31 with the United States Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (“EEOC”) a complaint in 2011, African Americans constituted 18% of all NYPD police officers and 16% of all detectives, but only 6% of Intelligence Division personnel and 7% of Intelligence Division detectives. 6. Of the African-American detectives in the Intelligence Division, the vast majority were of the lowest grade, Third Grade Detectives. Third Grade Detectives make approximately less per year than Second Grade Detectives and approximately per year less than First Grade Detective Summary: This 2017 lawsuit was brought by three detectives of the NYPD in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York. The plaintiffs claimed that the City of New York and various agents of the NYPD had violated Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 by implementing a secretive policy of refusing to promote deserving African American detectives solely based on race. The parties reached a confidential settlement that was reported to include in damages to cover backpay and loss of reputation.

This 2017 lawsuit was brought by three detectives of the NYPD in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York. The plaintiffs claimed that the City of New York and various agents of the NYPD had violated Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 by implementing a secretive policy of refusing to promote deserving African American detectives solely based on race. The parties reached a confidential settlement that was reported to include in damages to cover backpay and loss of reputation.

Using the provided source, generate a concise summary: SECTION SECTION Case SECTION 1 As of 10 24 PM EDT 1 of 38 U.S. District Court Southern District of New York (Foley Square) CIVIL DOCKET FOR CASE # 1 CLOSED,ECF H. et al v. Eggleston Date Filed Assigned to Judge Katherine B. Forrest Date Terminated Related SECTION Case SECTION 1 Jury Demand None Cause 42 12112 Americans with Disabilities Act - Employment Nature of Suit 446 Civil Rights Discrimination Americans with Disabilities - Other Jurisdiction Federal Question SECTION PlaintiffSECTION Lovely H. individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated. represented by Carolyn Walker-Diallo NYC Law Department, Office of the Corporation Counsel (NYC) 100 Church Street New York, NY 10007 Fax Email [email protected] TERMINATED LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED Kathleen Mary Kelleher The Legal Aid Society (Civil Div. NYC) 199 Water Street 3rd Floor New York, NY 10038 212 Fax 212 Email [email protected] LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED Kenneth Richard Stephens The Legal Aid Society (Civil Div. NYC) 199 Water Street 3rd Floor New York, NY 10038 Fax Email [email protected] LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED Sean Miles Murphy Milbank, Tweed, Hadley & McCloy LLP 28 Liberty Street New York, NY 10005 Fax Email [email protected] LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED Richard Elliot Blum The Legal Aid Society (Civil Div. NYC) 199 Water Street 3rd Floor New York, NY 10038 SECTION Case SECTION 1 As of 10 24 PM EDT 2 of 38 Fax Email [email protected] ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED Susan Elizabeth Welber The Legal Aid Society (Brooklyn) 111 Livingston Street Brooklyn, NY 11201 (718) Email [email protected] ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED SECTION PlaintiffSECTION Gloria Q. individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated. represented by Carolyn Walker-Diallo (See above for address) TERMINATED LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED Kathleen Mary Kelleher (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED Kenneth Richard Stephens (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED Sean Miles Murphy (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED Richard Elliot Blum (See above for address) ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED Susan Elizabeth Welber (See above for address) ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED SECTION PlaintiffSECTION Michele N. individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated. represented by Carolyn Walker-Diallo (See above for address) TERMINATED LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED Kathleen Mary Kelleher (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED Kenneth Richard Stephens (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED Sean Miles Murphy (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED SECTION Case SECTION 1 As of 10 24 PM EDT 3 of 38 Richard Elliot Blum (See above for address) ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED Susan Elizabeth Welber (See above for address) ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED SECTION PlaintiffSECTION Courtney B. represented by Kathleen Mary Kelleher (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED Sean Miles Murphy (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED Kenneth Richard Stephens (See above for address) ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED Susan Elizabeth Welber (See above for address) ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED SECTION PlaintiffSECTION Eula S. individually and on behalf of all others similary situated represented by Kathleen Mary Kelleher (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED Sean Miles Murphy (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED Kenneth Richard Stephens (See above for address) ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED Susan Elizabeth Welber (See above for address) ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED SECTION PlaintiffSECTION Laura S. represented by Kathleen Mary Kelleher (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED Sean Miles Murphy (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED Kenneth Richard Stephens (See above for address) ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED Susan Elizabeth Welber (See above for address) S Summary: On August 3, 2006, plaintiffs, a group of disabled persons receiving public benefits filed a lawsuit in the U.S. District Court for the South District of New York against the New York Human Resources Administration alleging that it discriminated against disabled persons by involuntarily segregating them by transferring their public benefits cases from local benefit centers to three hub centers that only serviced people with disabilities. The Court approved a proposed settlement agreement in June of 2015.

On August 3, 2006, plaintiffs, a group of disabled persons receiving public benefits filed a lawsuit in the U.S. District Court for the South District of New York against the New York Human Resources Administration alleging that it discriminated against disabled persons by involuntarily segregating them by transferring their public benefits cases from local benefit centers to three hub centers that only serviced people with disabilities. The Court approved a proposed settlement agreement in June of 2015.

Using the provided source, generate a concise summary: SECTION UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK E.F., a minor, by and through her parent and natural guardian, Marie Farrell; A.S., a minor, by and through his parent and natural guardian, Mariya Pustovalova; L.P., a minor, by and through his parent and natural guardian, Jennifer Petri, on behalf of themselves and a class of those similarly situated, and Disability Rights New York, SECTION PlaintiffSECTION s, -against- THE NEW YORK CITY DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION; THE CITY OF NEW YORK; RICHARD CARRANZA, in his official capacity as Chancellor of the New York City Department of Education, SECTION DefendantSECTION s. No. CLASS ACTION COMPLAINT INTRODUCTION 1. This civil rights class action lawsuit is brought against the New York City Department of Education (the “DOE”), the City of New York (the “City”), and Richard A. Carranza in his official capacity as the Chancellor of the New York City Department of Education (the “Chancellor”) (collectively “SECTION DefendantSECTION s”) on behalf of a class of almost 2,000 Staten Island students with disabilities who are being educated in segregated and unequal public schools and classrooms in violation of the Americans with Disabilities Act (“ADA”), Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act (“Section 504”), the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (“IDEA”), and the New York City Human Rights Law (“NYCHRL”). 1 2. The DOE funds and operates a wholly separate citywide school district based solely on disability known as District 75, which on Staten Island draws students from Staten Island public schools (“Staten Island District 75”). 3. The DOE created District 75 to serve as a separate school district for students with “moderate to severe disabilities,” including autism spectrum disorders, cognitive delays, sensory impairments, emotional disturbances, and multiple disabilities. 4. Over 25,000 students with disabilities attend District 75 schools citywide, and almost 2,000 students with disabilities attend Staten Island District 75 schools. 5. District 75 students are placed in a separate District 75 school (containing only District 75 students) or a co-located District 75 placement that is composed of classrooms located within a neighborhood DOE school. 6. Regardless of the District 75 setting in which students are placed, District 75 students spend all or almost all of their school day segregated from students without disabilities. 7. Students with disabilities placed in Staten Island District 75 schools could be educated successfully alongside students without disabilities in traditional, neighborhood public schools—also called “community schools”—in Staten Island, if provided with appropriate and legally required services and supports. 8. The Staten Island District 75 school system denies students with disabilities equal educational opportunities by forcing them into a segregated environment, providing them with an education that is not comparable to that which students without disabilities receive, and denying them access to electives, extracurricular activities, or other opportunities to interact with students without disabilities, such as lunch or recess. 2 9. In 2008, at the DOE’s request, the Council of the Great City Schools (“CGCS”), one of the leading national organizations supporting urban education, put the DOE on notice that by funding and operating District 75 it is improperly and inefficiently consuming and diverting resources that should be spent on providing students with disabilities with an integrated learning environment in community schools. 10. The CGCS report concluded that “the isolation of students is more pronounced in the New York City school system than in other major urban school systems...” 11. By continuing to isolate unnecessarily students with disabilities in Staten Island District 75 schools, SECTION DefendantSECTION s perpetuate stigma, misunderstanding, and fear and reinforce feelings of shame and unworthiness for students with Summary: Students sued the New York City Department of Education, the City of New York, and the chancellor of the New York City Department of Education to seek injunctive relief under the Americans with Disabilities Act, the Individuals with Disabilities in Education Act, Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act, and New York state law. The student plaintiffs are either student in Staten Island District 75 schools or vulnerable to being sent to those schools, which are separated from New York City community schools. District 75 students receive their education in a restrictive setting where they are largely isolated from interactions with students who do not have disabilities. Plaintiffs seek injunctive relief in the form of a permanent injunction against future violations and an order for a remedial plan to reimagine policies, practices, and norms that will permit each student to learn in the most integrated setting possible. The case remains open.

Students sued the New York City Department of Education, the City of New York, and the chancellor of the New York City Department of Education to seek injunctive relief under the Americans with Disabilities Act, the Individuals with Disabilities in Education Act, Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act, and New York state law. The student plaintiffs are either student in Staten Island District 75 schools or vulnerable to being sent to those schools, which are separated from New York City community schools. District 75 students receive their education in a restrictive setting where they are largely isolated from interactions with students who do not have disabilities. Plaintiffs seek injunctive relief in the form of a permanent injunction against future violations and an order for a remedial plan to reimagine policies, practices, and norms that will permit each student to learn in the most integrated setting possible. The case remains open.

Using the provided source, generate a concise summary: SECTION Case 5 As of 10 32 PM EST Page 1 of 2 APPEAL,CLOSED U.S. District Court Eastern District of Kentucky (Lexington) CIVIL DOCKET FOR CASE # 5 Jones v. Clark County, Kentucky et al Assigned to Judge Joseph M. Hood Case in other court 6CCA, Cause 42 1983 Civil Rights Act SECTION PlaintiffSECTION David Jones Individually and on behalf of all persons similarly situated Date Filed Date Terminated Jury Demand None Nature of Suit 440 Civil Rights Other Jurisdiction Federal Question represented by Camille Bathurst Belzley Bathurst, Attorneys P.O. Box 278 Prospect, KY 40059 Email [email protected] LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED Gregory Allen Belzley Belzley Bathurst, Attorneys P.O. Box 278 Prospect, KY 40059 Email [email protected] LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED Matthew Wayne Boyd Boyd Law Office, PSC 155 E. Main Street Suite 220 Lexington, KY 40507 Fax Email [email protected] LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED V. SECTION DefendantSECTION Clark County, Kentucky SECTION DefendantSECTION Frank Doyle Individually represented by Jeffrey C. Mando Adams, Stepner, Woltermann & Dusing, PLLC 40 W. Pike Street Covington, KY 41011 Fax Email [email protected] ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED represented by Jeffrey C. Mando (See above for address) ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED Date Filed # Docket Text Case 5 As of 10 32 PM EST Page 2 of 2 1 COMPLAINT ( Filing fee $400; receipt number filed by David Jones. (Attachments # 1 Tendered Summons, # 2 Civil Cover Sheet)(LC) Modified filing date on (LC). (Entered 3 Summons Issued as to Clark County, Kentucky, Frank Doyle; Summons issued and returned to counsel electronically (LC) (Entered Conflict Check run. (LC) (Entered 4 MOTION to Dismiss for failure to state a claim by Clark County, Kentucky, Frank Doyle (Attachments # 1 Proposed Order)(Mando, Jeffrey) (Entered 5 RESPONSE in Opposition re 4 MOTION to Dismiss for failure to state a claim by Clark County, Kentucky, Frank Doyle filed by David Jones. (Attachments # 1 Exhibit Motion for Discretionary Review in Cole v. Warren County, # 2 Proposed Order)(Belzley, Gregory) (Entered 6 Proposed Agreed Order/Stipulation by Clark County, Kentucky, Frank Doyle. (Mando, Jeffrey) (Entered 7 VIRTUAL ORDER re 6 Proposed Agreed Order/Stipulation The time for SECTION DefendantSECTION s to file a Reply Memorandum in Support of their Motion to Dismiss 4 is extended until February 9, 2016. Signed by Judge Joseph M. Hood on COR (Entered 8 REPLY to 4 Motion to dismiss filed by Clark County, Kentucky, Frank Doyle. (Mando, Jeffrey) Modified to add description on (LC). (Entered ***MOTION SUBMITTED TO CHAMBERS of Judge Hood for review re 4 MOTION to Dismiss for failure to state a claim by Clark County, Kentucky, Frank Doyle (LC) (Entered 9 MEMORANDUM OPINION & ORDER 1. Dft's motion to dismiss 4 is GRANTED. 2. All claims alleged in the complaint against dfts are DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE. 3. All pending motions are DENIED AS MOOT. 4. All deadlines and scheduled proceedings are CONTINUED GENERALLY. 5. The Clerk shall STRIKE THIS MATTER FROM THE ACTIVE DOCKET. 6. This order is a FINAL AND APPEALABLE ORDER and THERE IS NO JUST CAUSE FOR DELAY. Signed by Judge Joseph M. Hood on COR (Entered 10 JUDGMENT 1. Judgment is entered in favor of dfts. 2. This action is DISMISSED AND STRICKEN FROM THE ACTIVE DOCKET. 3. All pending motions are DENIED AS MOOT. 4. All scheduled proceedings are CONTINUED GENERALLY. 5. This Order is FINAL AND APPEALABLE and THERE IS NO JUST CAUSE FOR DELAY. Signed by Judge Joseph M. Hood on COR (Entered 11 NOTICE OF APPEAL as to 9 Memorandum Opinion & Order, Terminate Motions, 10 Judgment, by David Jones. Filing fee $ 505, receipt number (Belzley, Gregory) (Entered USCA Case Number Case Manager Cheryl Borkowski for 11 Notice of Appeal filed by David Jones. (LC) (Entered 12 INFORMATION COPY OF ORDER/JUDGMENT of USCA as to 11 Notice of Appeal filed by David Jones Appeal - judgment of the District Court is affirmed - Mandate to issue. (Attachments # 1 cover ltr)(KJR) (Entered Summary: In 2015, prisoners in the Kentucky Clark County Jail filed this class action in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Kentucky, alleging that the state did not afford adequate procedural right prior to unlawfully charging inmates a fee for their incarceration without an order from the sentencing court. The plaintiffs sought a declaratory judgment, permanent injunction of the practice, and monetary damages. The court granted the defendants' motion to dismiss and dismissed all claims alleged in the complaint with prejudice, and all pending motions were denied moot. In 2016, the plaintiffs appealed but the appeals court affirmed the judgment of the district court.

In 2015, prisoners in the Kentucky Clark County Jail filed this class action in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Kentucky, alleging that the state did not afford adequate procedural right prior to unlawfully charging inmates a fee for their incarceration without an order from the sentencing court. The plaintiffs sought a declaratory judgment, permanent injunction of the practice, and monetary damages. The court granted the defendants' motion to dismiss and dismissed all claims alleged in the complaint with prejudice, and all pending motions were denied moot. In 2016, the plaintiffs appealed but the appeals court affirmed the judgment of the district court.

Using the provided source, generate a concise summary: SECTION SECTION Case SECTION 4 As of 04 27 PM CDT 1 of 13 U.S. District Court Eastern District of Arkansas (Little Rock) CIVIL DOCKET FOR CASE # 4 HLJ,TERMED Bradley, et al v. Arkansas Education, et al Assigned to Judge James M. Moody Demand $0 Case in other court E/D Arkansas, 4 1, 4 USCA8, USCA8, USCA8, USCA8, USDC E/D AR, Cause 42 1983 Civil Rights Act SECTION PlaintiffSECTION Date Filed Date Terminated Jury Demand None Nature of Suit 440 Civil Rights Other Jurisdiction Federal Question Thomas Bradley as Natural Guardians of, and on behalf of David Bradley, a minor, individually and on behalf of themselves and all others similarly situated unknown David Bradley represented by Luther Oneal Sutter Sutter &Gillham, PLLC Post Office Box 2012 Benton, AR 72018 Fax Email [email protected] LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED Max Lapertosa Public Interest Law Center of Philadelphia 125 South Ninth Street Suite 700 Philadelphia, PA 19107 (215) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED Michael Churchill Public Interest Law Center of Philadelphia 125 South Ninth Street Suite 700 Philadelphia, PA 19107 (215) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED Thomas K. Gilhool Public Interest Law Center of Philadelphia 125 South Ninth Street Suite 700 Philadelphia, PA 19107 (215) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED SECTION PlaintiffSECTION Dianna Bradley as Natural Guardians of, and on behalf of represented by Luther Oneal Sutter (See above for address) SECTION Case SECTION 4 As of 04 27 PM CDT 2 of 13 David Bradley, a minor, individually and on behalf of themselves and all others similarly situated LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED Max Lapertosa (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED Michael Churchill (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED Thomas K. Gilhool (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED V. SECTION DefendantSECTION Arkansas Department of Education SECTION DefendantSECTION Mike Crowley individually and in his capacity as an employee of the Arkansas Department of Education SECTION DefendantSECTION Williford School District 39 represented by Sherri L. Robinson UAMS Office of General Counsel 4301 West Markham Street Slot #860 Little Rock, AR Fax Email LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED Tim C. Humphries Arkansas State Board of Election Commissioners 501 Woodlane Suite 401 N Little Rock, AR 72201 (501) TERMINATED LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED represented by Sherri L. Robinson (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED Tim C. Humphries (See above for address) TERMINATED LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED represented by W. Paul Blume Attorney at Law Post Office Box 3065 Little Rock, AR 72203 Fax SECTION Case SECTION 4 As of 04 27 PM CDT 3 of 13 Email LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED SECTION DefendantSECTION John Doe 1 - 10 Date Filed # Docket Text 1 ORDER by Judge James M. Moody granting motion to proceed in forma pauperis in misc case (cc all counsel) lej) (Entered 2 COMPLAINT, summonses issued and returned to Atty lej) (Entered 3 MEMO TO FILE regarding service of complaint lej) (Entered 4 RETURN OF SERVICE executed upon defendant Arkansas Education on (bkp) (Entered 5 RETURN OF SERVICE executed upon defendant Mike Crowley on (bkp) (Entered 6 RETURN OF SERVICE executed upon defendant Williford School on (bkp) (Entered 7 ANSWER by defendant Williford School (bkp) Modified on (Entered 8 ANSWER by Arkansas Education and Mike Crowley (bkp) (Entered 9 SCHEDULING ORDER court trial set for 9 15 discovery due status report due pretrial info sheet due (cc all counsel) (bmt) (Entered 10 MOTION by plaintiffs to continue (bkp) (Entered 11 AMENDED SCHEDULING ORDER (DOC) court trial set for 9 15 on ; discovery due ; status report due ; pretrial info sheet due (cc all counsel) (bkp) (Entered 12 MEMO TO FILE finding the motion to continue moot by amended scheduling order filed on 3/3/97 10-1 (bkp) (Entered 13 MEMO TO FILE removing this cause from the class ac Summary: In 1996, parents of a student with autism filed this lawsuit on his behalf against the Arkansas Department of Education and the Williford School District under the IDEA, the ADA, Section 504, and 42 U.S.C. § 1983. The parents claimed that their son was unfairly discriminated against due to his disability and was deprived of an appropriate education. In 2004, the Eastern District of Arkansas Court held that neither defendant had violated the federal statutes and found for state and the school district.

In 1996, parents of a student with autism filed this lawsuit on his behalf against the Arkansas Department of Education and the Williford School District under the IDEA, the ADA, Section 504, and 42 U.S.C. § 1983. The parents claimed that their son was unfairly discriminated against due to his disability and was deprived of an appropriate education. In 2004, the Eastern District of Arkansas Court held that neither defendant had violated the federal statutes and found for state and the school district.

Using the provided source, generate a concise summary: SECTION SECTION Case SECTION 1 As of 11 12 AM EDT 1 of 8 U.S. District Court Northern District of Ohio (Cleveland) CIVIL DOCKET FOR CASE # 1 United States of America v. Village of Woodmere, Ohio Assigned to Judge Donald C. Nugent Cause 42 2000e Job Discrimination (Employment) SECTION PlaintiffSECTION Date Filed Date Terminated Jury Demand Both Nature of Suit 442 Civil Rights Jobs Jurisdiction U.S. Government SECTION PlaintiffSECTION United States of America represented by Rachel R. Hranitzky U.S. Department of Justice - Civil Rights Employment Litigation Section PHB, Room 4030 950 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW Washington, DC 20530 Fax Email [email protected] LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED Jodi B. Danis U.S. Department of Justice - Civil Rights Division 950 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW Washington, DC 20530 Fax Email [email protected] ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED Kristofor J. Hammond U.S. Department of Justice - Civil Rights Division 950 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW Washington, DC 20530 Fax Email [email protected] TERMINATED ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED Marcia W. Johnson Office of the U.S. Attorney - Cleveland Northern District of Ohio Ste. 400 801 Superior Avenue, W Cleveland, OH 44113 Fax Email [email protected] TERMINATED Robert L. Galbreath U.S. Department of Justice - Civil Rights Division 950 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW Washington, DC 20530 Fax SECTION Case SECTION 1 As of 11 12 AM EDT 2 of 8 Email [email protected] ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED William B. Fenton U.S. Department of Justice - Civil Rights Division 950 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW Washington, DC 20530 Fax Email [email protected] TERMINATED SECTION PlaintiffSECTION /Intervenor Amy Mengay represented by Avery S. Friedman Friedman & Associates 701 City Club Bldg. 850 Euclid Avenue Cleveland, OH 44114 Fax Email [email protected] ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED SECTION PlaintiffSECTION /Intervenor Timothy J Ellis represented by Avery S. Friedman (See above for address) ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED V. SECTION DefendantSECTION Village of Woodmere, Ohio 3rd Party SECTION PlaintiffSECTION Lamont Lockhart represented by John D. Latchney O'Toole McLaughlin Dooley & Pecora - SV 5455 Detroit Road Sheffield Village, OH 44054 Fax Email [email protected] ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED represented by Jaime M. Bouvier Giffen & Kaminski Ste. 1600 1300 East Ninth Street Cleveland, OH 44114 Fax Email [email protected] ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED Subodh Chandra Chandra Law Firm Ste. 400 1265 West Sixth Street Cleveland, OH 44113 Fax Email [email protected] ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED SECTION Case SECTION 1 As of 11 12 AM EDT 3 of 8 Date Filed # Docket Text 1 Complaint against Village of Woodmere, Ohio. Filed by United States of America. No summons issued. (Attachments # 1 Civil Cover Sheet)(C,BA) (Entered Random Assignment of Magistrate Judge pursuant to Local Rule 3.1. In the event of a referral, case will be assigned to Magistrate Judge McHargh. (C,BA) (Entered Service by Clerk by certified mail. Summons and Complaint addressed to Village of Woodmere, Ohio placed in U.S. Mail. (C,BA) (Entered 2 Praecipe for the issuance of summons and Clerk certified mail service on Village of Woodmere, Ohio filed by United States of America. (Certified mail envelope mailed by Clerk on (C,B) (Entered 3 Attorney Appearance and Designation of Lead Counsel by Kristofor J. Hammond filed by on behalf of United States of America. (Hammond, Kristofor) (Entered 4 Return of Service Executed upon Yolanda Broadie, Mayor by certified mail sent by Clerk's Office on 6/6/07 served for the United States of America (C,B) (Entered 5 Answer to Complaint with Jury Demand (Related Doc # 1 ) filed by Village of Woodmere, Ohio. (Latchney, John) (Entered 6 Motion to intervene as a party filed by Amy Mengay. Related document(s) 1. (Attachments # 1 Complaint)(Friedman, Avery) (Entered 7 Motion to intervene as a party filed by Timothy J Ellis. Related document(s) 1. (Attachments # 1 Complaint)(Friedman, Avery) (Entered 8 Case Management Conference Scheduling Notice/Order with case management conference to be held on at 10 00 AM in Chambers 15A before Judge Hon. Donald C. Nugent. Signed by Judge Donald C. Nugent on (Entered 9 Joint Report of Parties' Planning Meeting held on July 24, 2007. Parties do not consent to this case being assigned to the magistrate judge. Filed by Amy Mengay, United States of America, Timothy J Ellis, Village of Woodmere, Ohio. (Hammond, Kristofor) (Entered 10 Minutes of proceedings of Case Management Conference held before Judge Donald C. Nugent. The case is assigned to the Standard track. Discovery cut off date is February 1, 2008 and motion cut off date to be determined. Judge Donald C. Nugent (R,JM) (Entered 11 Marginal Order granting Motion to intervene as a party. (Related Doc # 6 ). Signed by Judge Donald C. Nugent(R,JM) (Entered 12 Marginal Order granting Motion to intervene as a party. (Related Doc # 7 ) Signed by Judge Donald C. Nugent(R,JM) (Entered 13 Answer to Complaint of Timothy J. Ellis filed by Village of Woodmere, Ohio. Related document(s) 7. (Latchney, John) (Entered 14 Answer to Complaint of Amy Mengay filed by Village of Woodmere, Ohio. Related document(s) 6. (Latchney, John) (Entered Notice (Non-document) of Status Conference set for 09 00 AM in Chambers 15A before Hon. Donald C. Nugent. (R,JM) (Entered Notice of RE-SCHEDULED Status Conference set for 09 00 AM in Chambers 15A before Hon. Donald C. Nugent. (R,JM) (Entered 15 Attorney Appearance by Robert L. Galbreath filed by on behalf of United States of America. (Galbreath, Robert) (Entered SECTION Case SECTION 1 As of 11 12 AM EDT 4 of 8 16 Minutes of proceedings.Status Conference held on ( Status Conference set for 09 00 AM in Chambers 15A before Judge Donald C. Nugent., Discovery is ongoing, Dispositive Motions due by opposition due and reply due before Judge Donald C. Nugent (C,B) (Entered 17 Motion to compel discovery filed by SECTION PlaintiffSECTION United States of America. (Attachments # 1 Brief in Support Memorandum in Support, # 2 Exhibit Exhibits A-K)(Hammond, Kristofor) (Entered 18 Opposition to 17 Motion to compel discovery filed by Village of Woodmere, Ohio. (Latchney, John) (Entered 19 Notice of Service of Documents in Response to SECTION PlaintiffSECTION United States' Requests for Production of Documents filed by Village of Woodmere, Ohio. (Latchney, John) (Entered 20 Notice of Service of Documents in Response to SECTION PlaintiffSECTION United States' Requests for Production of Documents Nos 15 and 29 filed by Village of Woodmere, Ohio. (Latchney, John) (Entered 21 Notice of Service of Supplemental Response to Request for Production No. 29 (Resumes) filed by Village of Woodmere, Ohio. (Latchney, John) (Entered 22 Joint Motion for extension of February 1, 2008 Discovery Completion until April 1, 2008 filed by Amy Mengay, Timothy J Ellis, SECTION PlaintiffSECTION United States of America, SECTION DefendantSECTION Village of Woodmere, Ohio. (Attachments # 1 Brief in Support Memorandum in Support of Joint Motion to Extend Time for Discovery)(Hammond, Kristofor) (Entered 23 Marginal Entry Order granting United States of America's Motion to compel production of documents. The Court is aware that SECTION DefendantSECTION has already complied with certain requests contained in this motion and that SECTION DefendantSECTION will make a diligent effort to fully respond as it is able. (Related Doc # 17 ). Signed by Judge Donald C. Nugent on (Entered 24 Marginal Entry Order granting the Joint Motion to Extend time for discovery. Discovery is extended to Signed by Judge Donald C. Nugent on doc 22 )(B,B) (Entered 25 Minutes of proceedings. Status Conference held on Discovery due by Dispositive Motions due by and response is due reply, if any, due There is a final status conference set for at 9 00 AM in Chambers 15A before Judge Donald C. Nugent. (C,B) Modified docket text on (R,N). (Entered 26 Notice of Service of SECTION PlaintiffSECTION Amy Mengay's First Request for Production of Documents to SECTION DefendantSECTION s The Village of Woodmere, Yolanda Broadie, Gerald Carrier, Joyce Holbert, James Jordan, Carolyn Patrick and Shelley Ross filed by Amy Mengay. (Attachments # 1 Notice of Service to Broadie, # 2 Notice of Service to Carrier, # 3 Notice of Service to Holbert, # 4 Notice of Service to Jordan, # 5 Notice of Service to Patrick, # 6 Notice of Service to Ross)(Friedman, Avery) (Entered 27 Response to Motion to Consolidate filed by United States of America. (Attachments # 1 Exhibit A - Kollin Complaint, # 2 Exhibit B - Motion to Consolidate, # 3 Exhibit C - Kollin Memorandum in Support of Motion to Consolidate)(Hammond, Kristofor) Modified docket text on (R,N). (Entered 28 Joint Motion for an Increase in the Number of Depositions, with attached memorandum in support, filed by Amy Mengay, Timothy J Ellis, SECTION PlaintiffSECTION United States of America. (Hammond, Kristofor) Modified docket text on (R,N). (Entered 29 Attorney Appearance and Substitution by Jodi B. Danis filed by on behalf of United States of America. (Danis, Jodi) (Entered SECTION Case SECTION 1 As of 11 12 AM EDT 5 of 8 30 Joint Motion for protective order Sequestering Deposition Witnesses filed by SECTION PlaintiffSECTION United States of America. (Attachments # 1 Exhibit Exhibits A-E to Joint Motion)(Danis, Jodi) (Entered 31 Motion for protective order filed by SECTION DefendantSECTION Village of Woodmere, Ohio. (Attachments # 1 Exhibit A & B)(Latchney, John) (Entered Order (non-document) denying SECTION PlaintiffSECTION's Motion for protective order (Related Doc # 30 ) Entered on behalf of Judge Donald C. Nugent on (R,JM) Modified docket text on (R,N). (Entered 32 Minutes of proceedings.Discovery Hearing held on before Judge Donald C. Nugent (Court Reporter Kim Giel.) (C,B) (Entered 33 Motion for extension of time until Friday, April 4, 2008 to respond or otherwise object to SECTION PlaintiffSECTION United States of America's First Set of Requests for Admission, Second Set of Interrogatories, and Fourth Set of Requests for Production of Documents filed by SECTION DefendantSECTION Village of Woodmere, Ohio. (Latchney, John) (Entered 34 Response to 33 Motion for extension of time until Friday, April 4, 2008 to respond or otherwise object to SECTION PlaintiffSECTION United States of America's First Set of Requests for Admission, Second Set of Interrogatories, and Fourth Set of Requests for Production of filed by United States of America. (Galbreath, Robert) (Entered 35 Reply to response to 33 Motion for extension of time until Friday, April 4, 2008 to respond or otherwise object to SECTION PlaintiffSECTION United States of America's First Set of Requests for Admission, Second Set of Interrogatories, and Fourth Set of Requests for Production of filed by Village of Woodmere, Ohio. (Attachments # 1 Appendix RFAs, # 2 Appendix RFPDs, # 3 Appendix 2d Set of Interrogs)(Latchney, John) (Entered 36 Notice of Service of Responses and Objections to SECTION PlaintiffSECTION Mengay's First Request for Production of Documents filed by Village of Woodmere, Ohio. (Attachments # 1 Appendix, # 2 Appendix, # 3 Appendix, # 4 Appendix, # 5 Appendix, # 6 Appendix)(Latchney, John) (Entered 37 Notice of Service of Responses and Objections to SECTION PlaintiffSECTION Mengay's First Request for Production of Documents filed by Village of Woodmere, Ohio. (Attachments # 1 Appendix)(Latchney, John) (Entered Minutes of proceedings non-document. The parties contacted Magistrate Judge McHargh's chambers regarding a dispute that arrose at depositions that were being held on In attendance were Attorney Jodi Danis for the United States; Attorney Subodh Chandra for Lamont Lockart; Attorney John Latchney for Village of Woodmere and Attorney Avery Friedman for plaintiffs' Amy Mengay and Tim Ellis. Prior to the Magistrate meeting with the parties, the parties worked out their differences. Time 15 minutes (Court Reporter None.) Associated Cases 1 1 1 (Entered 38 Notice of Service of answers and objections to 2nd set of interrogatories and responses and objections to 4th requests for production of documents filed by Village of Woodmere, Ohio. (Attachments # 1 Appendix, # 2 Appendix)(Latchney, John) Modified docket text on (R,N). (Entered 39 Notice of Service of Responses and Objections to SECTION PlaintiffSECTION United States Requests for Admission filed by Village of Woodmere, Ohio. (Attachments # 1 Appendix)(Latchney, John) (Entered Order (non-document) granting 33 Motion for Extension of Time 33 until Friday, April 4, 2008 to respond or otherwise object to SECTION PlaintiffSECTION United States of America's First Set of Requests for Admission, Second Set of Interrogatories, and Fourth Set of Requests for Production. Entered on behalf of Judge Donald C. Nugent on 4/8/08 (R,JM) Modified docket text on (R,N). (Entered 40 Attorney Appearance by Rachel R. Hranitzky filed by on behalf of United States of America. (Hranitzky, Rachel) (Entered SECTION Case SECTION 1 As of 11 12 AM EDT 6 of 8 41 Motion to compel production of documents with proposed order attached, filed by SECTION PlaintiffSECTION United States of America. (Attachments # 1 Brief in Support, # 2 Exhibit A - T)(Hammond, Kristofor) Modified docket text and attachment descriptions on (R,N). (Entered 42 Notice to take Deposition of SECTION PlaintiffSECTION -Intervenor Amy Mengay on Wednesday, May 7, 2008 at 9 00 a.m. filed by Village of Woodmere, Ohio. (Latchney, John) (Entered 43 Notice to take Deposition of SECTION PlaintiffSECTION -Intervenor Timothy Ellis on Thursday, May 8, 2008 at 9 00 a.m. filed by Village of Woodmere, Ohio. (Latchney, John) (Entered 44 Notice to take Deposition of Lamont Lockhart on Tuesday, May 13 through Thursday, May 15, 2008 at 9 00 a.m. filed by Village of Woodmere, Ohio. (Latchney, John) (Entered 45 Motion to compel discovery and for other relief filed by SECTION PlaintiffSECTION /Intervenor Amy Mengay. Related document(s) 37, 26, 36. (Attachments # 1 Memorandum in Support, # 2 Exhibit 1, # 3 Exhibit 2, # 4 Exhibit Avery) (Entered 46 Amended Notice to take Deposition of SECTION PlaintiffSECTION -Intervenor Timothy Ellis on Wednesday, May 7, 2008 at 9 00 a.m. filed by Village of Woodmere, Ohio. (Latchney, John) (Entered 47 Amended Notice to take Deposition of SECTION PlaintiffSECTION -Intervenor Amy Mengay on Thursday, May 8, 2008 at 9 00 a.m. filed by Village of Woodmere, Ohio. (Latchney, John) (Entered 48 Notice of Service of Amended Responses and Objections to SECTION PlaintiffSECTION Amy Mengay's First Request for Production of Documents to SECTION DefendantSECTION s Gerald Carrier, James Jordan, and Carolyn Patrick filed by Village of Woodmere, Ohio. (Attachments # 1 Appendix Carrier Amended Responses and Objections to Mengay's First RFPDs, # 2 Appendix Jordan Amended Responses and Objections to Mengay's First RFPDs, # 3 Appendix Patrick Amended Responses and Objections to Mengay's First RFPDs, # 4 Appendix List of Interview Questions in Response to RFPD No. 21 to Patrick)(Latchney, John) (Entered 49 Opposition to 41 Motion to compel discovery including psychological evaluations and extend time for oral discovery and Motion for Protective Order filed by Village of Woodmere, Ohio. (Latchney, John) (Entered 50 Joint Motion for extension of Oral Discovery until June 30, 2008 filed by all parties. (Hranitzky, Rachel) Modified party filers on (R,N). (Entered 51 Opposition to 45 Motion to compel discovery and for other relief filed by all defendants. (Attachments # 1 Appendix Carrier Amended Responses to RPFDs, # 2 Appendix Jordan Amended Responses to RFPDs, # 3 Appendix Patrick Amended Responses to RFPDs)(Latchney, John) (Entered 52 Second Amended Notice to take Deposition of SECTION PlaintiffSECTION -Intervenor Timothy Ellis on Thursday, May 15, 2008 at 9 00 a.m. filed by Village of Woodmere, Ohio. (Latchney, John) Modified docket text on (R,N). (Entered 53 Second Amended Notice to take Deposition of SECTION PlaintiffSECTION -Intervenor Amy Mengay on Thursday, May 22, 2008 at 9 00 a.m. filed by Village of Woodmere, Ohio. (Latchney, John) Modified docket text on (R,N). (Entered 54 Reply to response to 41 Motion to compel discovery including psychological evaluations and extend time for oral discovery and Opposition to SECTION DefendantSECTION's Motion for Protective Order filed by United States of America. (Attachments # 1 Exhibit A - E)(Hammond, Kristofor) (Entered 55 Notice of Service of Answers and Objections to SECTION PlaintiffSECTION USA's 2d Set of Requests for Admission to SECTION DefendantSECTION Village of Woodmere filed by all defendants. (Attachments # 1 Appendix Responses and Objections to SECTION PlaintiffSECTION USA's 2d Set of Requests for Admission)(Latchney, John) (Entered SECTION Case SECTION 1 As of 11 12 AM EDT 7 of 8 56 Notice of Service of Amended Responses and Objections to SECTION PlaintiffSECTION Amy Mengay's First Request for Production of Documents to SECTION DefendantSECTION Shelley B. Ross filed by Village of Woodmere, Ohio. (Attachments # 1 Appendix Amended Responses and Objections to SECTION PlaintiffSECTION Amy Mengay's First Request for Production of Documents to SECTION DefendantSECTION Shelley B. Ross)(Latchney, John) (Entered Order non-document granting 50 the Joint Motion to Extend Time for Oral Discovery until June 30, 2008. Entered on behalf of Judge Donald C. Nugent on (R,JM) Modified docket text on (R,N). (Entered 57 Minutes of proceedings before Judge Donald C. Nugent. Status Conference held on Court has extended discovery to Responses to motions to compel are due within 7 calendar days of filing, written discovery to be disclosed to plaintiff by dispositive motions are due by responses are due by replies are due by trial is set for 8 30 a.m. on in Courtroom 15A before Judge Donald C. Nugent, trial order to issue, status conference set for 10 00 a.m. on all plaintiffs are required to submit confidential settlement proposals to defendant by defendants to respond in writing by -- all confidentially. (Court Reporter None) (B,B) Modified text on (B,B). (Entered 58 Motion to compel discovery, Proposed Order and Certificate of Mailing filed by SECTION PlaintiffSECTION United States of America. (Attachments # 1 Brief in Support, # 2 Exhibits 1 to Rachel) Modified docket text and document descriptions on (R,N). (Entered 63 Marginal Entry Order denying as moot Motion to compel discovery (Related Doc # 45 ); At status SECTION DefendantSECTION claims to have complied, as it is able under the law; Court to continue monitoring. Judge Donald C. Nugent on (Entered 59 Order granting Motion to compel production of documents (Related Doc # 41 ); information contained in medical and psychological records, to be kepted strictly confidential. Judge Donald C. Nugent on (Entered 60 Notice of Service filed by Village of Woodmere, Ohio. (Attachments # 1 Appendix Amended Responses and Objections to SECTION PlaintiffSECTION Amy Mengay's First Request for Production of Documents to SECTION DefendantSECTION Village of Woodmere, # 2 Appendix Invoices (Response to RFPD No. 19), # 3 Appendix Ad (Response to RFPD No. John) (Entered 61 Notice of Service filed by Village of Woodmere, Ohio. (Attachments # 1 Appendix Amended Responses and Objections to SECTION PlaintiffSECTION Amy Mengay's First Request for Production of Documents to SECTION DefendantSECTION Joyce Holbert)(Latchney, John) (Entered 62 Notice of Service filed by Village of Woodmere, Ohio. (Attachments # 1 Appendix Answer to SECTION PlaintiffSECTION United States of America's Third Set of Interrogatories to SECTION DefendantSECTION )(Latchney, John) (Entered 64 Notice to take Deposition of SECTION PlaintiffSECTION Lamont Lockhart on Monday, June 16, 2008 at 9 00 a.m. filed by all defendants. (Latchney, John) (Entered Order non-document granting Motion to compel entry and inspection of premises (Related Doc # 58 ). Signed by Judge Donald C. Nugent on (R,JM) Modified docket text on (R,N). (Entered 65 Notice to take Deposition of SECTION PlaintiffSECTION -Intervenor Amy Mengay on Friday, June 27, 2008 at 9 15 a.m. filed by Village of Woodmere, Ohio. (Latchney, John) (Entered 66 Notice of Withdrawal of Counsel filed by United States of America. (Hammond, Kristofor) (Entered 67 Civil Jury Trial Order with Jury Trial set for at 8 30 AM in Courtroom 15A before Judge Donald C. Nugent. (R,JM) Modified docket text on (R,N). (Entered SECTION Case SECTION 1 As of 11 12 AM EDT 8 of 8 68 Minutes of proceedings before Judge Donald C. Nugent.Status Conference held on ( Status Conference set for 09 00 AM in Courtroom 15A before Judge Donald C. Nugent.) (Court Reporter None.) (E,P) (Entered 69 Minutes of proceedings before Judge Donald C. Nugent of Status Conference held and all counsel participating. Council meets 8/6/08 and Mayor to sign Consent Decree for Court approval. A Status Conference set for 11 00 AM in to be held telephonically before Judge Donald C. Nugent. Court to sign Consent Decree. (R,JM) (Entered 70 Minutes of proceedings before Judge Donald C. Nugent.Status Conference held on 8/7/08 ( Status Conference set for at 09 00 AM to be held telephonically before Judge Donald C. Nugent.) Related document(s) 69. (C,B) (Entered 71 Joint Motion for Entry of Consent Decree filed by all parties. (Attachments # 1 Appendix Consent Decree)(Hranitzky, Rachel) Modified party filers on (R,N). (Entered 72 Marginal Entry Order granting Joint Motion to Enter Consent Decree (Related Doc # 71 )Judge Donald C. Nugent(R,JM) (Entered 73 Consent Decree resolving case without an adjudication or finding on the merits, parties to bear their own costs, with the Court retaining jurisdiction over the Decree for their purpose resolving disputes or entering any orders that may be necessary to implement the relief provided in the Decree; at the end of 3 years from the date of the entry of this decree, this decree shall be dissolved and this action shall be dismissed without further order of the Court. Related documents # 71, 72. Signed by Judge Donald C. Nugent on (C,B) Modified docket text on (R,N). (Entered Summary: On May 25, 2007 the United States Department of Justice (DOJ) filed a lawsuit against the Village of Woodmere, Ohio in the United States District Court for the Northern District of Ohio to enforce Title VII, 42 U.S.C. et seq. The D.O.J. asked the court for injunctive and compensatory relief, alleging the defendant had violated Title VII by discriminating against two employees in the defendant's police department on the basis of their race (white) in termination of their employment. The parties reached a settlement and the Court entered a three year consent decree on May 23, 2008. The defendant agreed to implement new policies to deal with racial discrimination complaints and provide mandatory nondiscrimination training. The individuals were to receive monetary awards, and one of them receive reinstatement.

On May 25, 2007 the United States Department of Justice (DOJ) filed a lawsuit against the Village of Woodmere, Ohio in the United States District Court for the Northern District of Ohio to enforce Title VII, 42 U.S.C. et seq. The D.O.J. asked the court for injunctive and compensatory relief, alleging the defendant had violated Title VII by discriminating against two employees in the defendant's police department on the basis of their race (white) in termination of their employment. The parties reached a settlement and the Court entered a three year consent decree on May 23, 2008. The defendant agreed to implement new policies to deal with racial discrimination complaints and provide mandatory nondiscrimination training. The individuals were to receive monetary awards, and one of them receive reinstatement.