Case: Moussouris v. Microsoft Corporation

2:15-cv-01483 | U.S. District Court for the Western District of Washington

Filed Date: Sept. 16, 2015

Case Ongoing

Clearinghouse coding complete

Case Summary

On September 16, 2015, the plaintiff, a former female technical employee of Microsoft, filed this class action lawsuit in the Western District of Washington against Microsoft Corporation. The plaintiff, represented by Outten & Golden LLP, sued the defendant under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, 42 U.S.C. § 2000(e), and state law. The plaintiff alleged that as a result of defendant’s policies, patterns, and practices, female technical employees received less compensation and were prom…

On September 16, 2015, the plaintiff, a former female technical employee of Microsoft, filed this class action lawsuit in the Western District of Washington against Microsoft Corporation. The plaintiff, represented by Outten & Golden LLP, sued the defendant under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, 42 U.S.C. § 2000(e), and state law. The plaintiff alleged that as a result of defendant’s policies, patterns, and practices, female technical employees received less compensation and were promoted less frequently than their male counterparts. Specifically, the plaintiff alleged that the force ranking system used by the defendant systematically undervalued female technical employees, resulting in lower pay and fewer promotions than male peers despite equal or better performance.

On October 27, 2015, the plaintiff amended her complaint to include additional named plaintiffs. On November 12, 2015, the defendant moved to dismiss for failure to state a claim on the following: plaintiffs’ disparate treatment claims on the grounds that the plaintiffs failed to allege intent to discriminate by defendant; plaintiffs’ disparate impact claims for failure to allege a causal relationship between the forced ranking system and the alleged disparate impact; and plaintiffs’ retaliation claims for failure to state a prima facie case of retaliation. Defendant also moved to strike plaintiffs’ class definition on the grounds it was not ascertainable and the plaintiffs’ Title VII claims on grounds of timeliness.

On March 7, 2016, the court (Judge James L. Robart) denied defendant’s motion to strike the class definition as it was not implausible on its face and the plaintiffs deserved to develop the facts and/or and definition of their class via class discovery. The court denied the motion to strike Title VII allegations on grounds of timeliness without prejudice as the motion raised a relevant dispute. The court denied the motion to dismiss plaintiffs’ disparate treatment claims as the plaintiffs satisfied the pleading requirements of the claim. The court also denied the motion to dismiss plaintiff’s retaliation claim as the allegations created a plausible inference that the plaintiffs suffered at least one adverse employment action while working for the defendant. However, the Court granted defendant’s motion to dismiss the disparate impact claims as the plaintiffs did not demonstrate sufficient factual allegations to show how the forced ranking system caused a systematic undervaluation of female technical employees. The Court granted plaintiffs thirty days to amend the complaint to resolve the lack of detail with respect to the disparate impact claim. 2016 WL 4472930.

On April 6, 2016, the plaintiffs submitted their second amended complaint, which contained additional factual allegations to support their disparate impact claim. The defendant filed a motion to dismiss the disparate impact claims of the second amended complaint on April 25, 2016. On October 14, 2016, the court denied the defendant’s motion to dismiss the plaintiffs’ disparate impact claim, finding the additional facts sufficient to make the plaintiffs’ claims plausible. 2016 WL 6037978.

Over the next year, the parties engaged in class discovery. On October 27, 2017, plaintiffs moved for class certification of female employees in Stock Levels 59-67 working in the Engineering and/or the I/T Operations Professions from September 16, 2012, to the present.

On April 6, 2018 the defendants moved for summary judgement. They argued that the plaintiffs were procedurally barred from bringing their claims due to statute of limitation issues and that they could not establish a proper case for disparate treatment. They also alleged that the named plaintiff's constructive discharge claim failed due to her continuing to work long after the work conditions became allegedly intolerable, and that their retaliation claims failed due to no adverse action being taken against them.

On June 25, 2018, the court denied the plaintiff's class certification in a sealed order. 2018 WL 3328418. The court concluded that the plaintiffs had not affirmatively demonstrated commonality of fact, typicality of claims, or adequate protection of interests among the class. On July 9, 2018, the plaintiffs appealed this ruling to the Ninth Circuit (Docket No. 18-80080).

On July 11, 2018, the court issue an order granting partial summary judgement for the defendants. 2018 WL 3584701. The defendant's motion for summary judgement for the denial of punitive damages under state law was granted, and the rest of their motion was denied, including leaving open the possibility for punitive damages under federal law. Due to identifying information contained within the order it has been sealed. On July 27, 2018, the plaintiffs appealed this order to the 9th Circuit (18-35791).

Both appeals are ongoing.

Summary Authors

Cade Boland (11/27/2017)

Carter Powers Beggs (11/19/2019)

People

For PACER's information on parties and their attorneys, see: https://www.courtlistener.com/docket/4537360/parties/moussouris-v-microsoft-corporation/


Judge(s)

Robart, James L. (Washington)

Attorneys(s) for Plaintiff

Bien, Rachel Megan (New York)

Chomski, Cara B. (New York)

Danna, Michael C (New York)

Dermody, Kelly M. (California)

Disney, Pamela (District of Columbia)

Eiland, Katrina L. (California)

Geman, Rachel (New York)

Greene, Cara Elizabeth (New York)

Klein, Adam T. (New York)

Judge(s)

Robart, James L. (Washington)

Attorneys(s) for Plaintiff

Bien, Rachel Megan (New York)

Chomski, Cara B. (New York)

Danna, Michael C (New York)

Dermody, Kelly M. (California)

Disney, Pamela (District of Columbia)

Eiland, Katrina L. (California)

Geman, Rachel (New York)

Greene, Cara Elizabeth (New York)

Klein, Adam T. (New York)

Lamy, Michelle A. (California)

Lee, Sharon M. (Washington)

Levin-Gesundheit, Michael (California)

Miazad, Ossai (New York)

Mollica, Paul William (Illinois)

Peterson, Michelle (Washington)

Sagafi, Jahan C (California)

Salahi, Yaman (California)

Shaver, Anne B. (California)

Stork, Elizabeth V. (New York)

Stromberg, Daniel (New York)

Subit, Michael C. (Washington)

Zegeye, Tiseme Gabriella (California)

Attorneys(s) for Defendant

Curtis, Wendy Butler (District of Columbia)

Damrell, Lauri A. (California)

Giese, Allison Riechert (California)

Hermle, Lynne C. (California)

Lawson, Megan M (California)

Liburt, Joseph (California)

Mantoan, Kathryn Grzenczyk (Oregon)

Parris, Mark Steven (Washington)

Perry, Jessica R. (California)

Rosenberg, Jill L (New York)

Shapiro, Marc R (New York)

Documents in the Clearinghouse

Document

Docket [PACER]

April 23, 2019 Docket
1

Class Action Complaint

Sept. 16, 2015 Complaint
52

Order

2016 WL 4472930

March 7, 2016 Order/Opinion
55

Second Amended Class Action Complaint

April 6, 2016 Complaint
134

Order

2016 WL 6037978

Oct. 14, 2016 Order/Opinion
191

Order Appointing Special Master

2017 WL 1652910

May 2, 2017 Order/Opinion
508

Order Denying Class Certification

July 6, 2018 Order/Opinion
512

Order on Motion for Summary Judgment

2018 WL 3584701

Nov. 11, 2018 Order/Opinion

Resources

Title Description External URL

Microsoft Gender Discrimination Class Action Lawsuit

Outten & Golden

The class action complaint alleges that Microsoft has engaged in systemic and pervasive discrimination against female employees in technical and engineering roles (“female technical employees”) with … Oct. 14, 2016 https://microsoftgendercase.com/

Docket

See docket on RECAP: https://www.courtlistener.com/docket/4537360/moussouris-v-microsoft-corporation/

Last updated May 11, 2022, 8 p.m.

ECF Number Description Date Link
1

COMPLAINT Class Action Complaint against defendant(s) Microsoft Corporation with JURY DEMAND (Receipt # 0981-4161088) Attorney Sharon M Lee added to party Katherine Moussouris(pty:pla), filed by Katherine Moussouris. (Attachments: # 1 Civil Cover Sheet)(Lee, Sharon) (Entered: 09/16/2015)

1 Civil Cover Sheet

View on PACER

Sept. 16, 2015 RECAP
2

PRAECIPE TO ISSUE SUMMONS by Plaintiff Katherine Moussouris (Lee, Sharon) (Entered: 09/16/2015)

Sept. 16, 2015 RECAP
3

APPLICATION OF ATTORNEY Kelly M. Dermody FOR LEAVE TO APPEAR PRO HAC VICE for Plaintiff Katherine Moussouris (Fee Paid) Receipt No. 0981-4163135 (Lee, Sharon) (Entered: 09/17/2015)

Sept. 17, 2015 PACER

Add and Terminate Judges

Sept. 17, 2015 PACER
4

APPLICATION OF ATTORNEY Anne B. Shaver FOR LEAVE TO APPEAR PRO HAC VICE for Plaintiff Katherine Moussouris (Fee Paid) Receipt No. 0981-4163156 (Lee, Sharon) (Entered: 09/17/2015)

Sept. 17, 2015 PACER
5

ORDER re 3 Application for Leave to Appear Pro Hac Vice. The Court ADMITS Attorney Kelly M Dermody for Katherine Moussouris, by Clerk William M McCool. No document associated with this docket entry, text only.NOTE TO COUNSEL: Local counsel agrees to sign all filings and to be prepared to handle the matter, including the trial thereof, in the event the applicant is unable to be present on any date scheduled by the court, pursuant to LCR 83.1(d).(DS) (Entered: 09/17/2015)

Sept. 17, 2015 PACER
6

ORDER re 4 Application for Leave to Appear Pro Hac Vice. The Court ADMITS Attorney Anne B. Shaver for Katherine Moussouris, by Clerk William M McCool. No document associated with this docket entry, text only.NOTE TO COUNSEL: Local counsel agrees to sign all filings and to be prepared to handle the matter, including the trial thereof, in the event the applicant is unable to be present on any date scheduled by the court, pursuant to LCR 83.1(d).(DS) (Entered: 09/17/2015)

Sept. 17, 2015 PACER

Judge James L. Robart added. (ST)

Sept. 17, 2015 PACER
7

Summons electronically issued as to defendant(s) Microsoft Corporation. (ST) (Entered: 09/17/2015)

Sept. 17, 2015 PACER
8

AMENDED COMPLAINT against defendant(s) Microsoft Corporation with JURY DEMAND, filed by Katherine Moussouris. (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit A)(Lee, Sharon) (Entered: 10/27/2015)

1 Exhibit A

View on PACER

Oct. 27, 2015 RECAP
9

NOTICE of Appearance by attorney Mark Steven Parris on behalf of Defendant Microsoft Corporation. (Attachments: # 1 Certificate of Service)(Parris, Mark) (Entered: 10/28/2015)

1 Certificate of Service

View on PACER

Oct. 28, 2015 RECAP
10

APPLICATION OF ATTORNEY Adam T. Klein FOR LEAVE TO APPEAR PRO HAC VICE for Plaintiffs Katherine Moussouris, Holly Muenchow, Dana Piermarini (Fee Paid) Receipt No. 0981-4214113 (Lee, Sharon) (Entered: 10/30/2015)

Oct. 30, 2015 RECAP
11

APPLICATION OF ATTORNEY Ossai Miazad FOR LEAVE TO APPEAR PRO HAC VICE for Plaintiffs Katherine Moussouris, Holly Muenchow, Dana Piermarini (Fee Paid) Receipt No. 0981-4214122 (Lee, Sharon) (Entered: 10/30/2015)

Oct. 30, 2015 RECAP
12

APPLICATION OF ATTORNEY Katrina Eiland FOR LEAVE TO APPEAR PRO HAC VICE for Plaintiffs Katherine Moussouris, Holly Muenchow, Dana Piermarini (Fee Paid) Receipt No. 0981-4214130 (Lee, Sharon) (Entered: 10/30/2015)

Oct. 30, 2015 RECAP
13

ORDER re 10 Application for Leave to Appear Pro Hac Vice. The Court ADMITS Attorney Adam T Klein for Katherine Moussouris, Holly Muenchow, and for Dana Piermarini, by Clerk William M McCool. No document associated with this docket entry, text only.NOTE TO COUNSEL: Local counsel agrees to sign all filings and to be prepared to handle the matter, including the trial thereof, in the event the applicant is unable to be present on any date scheduled by the court, pursuant to LCR 83.1(d).(DS) (Entered: 10/30/2015)

Oct. 30, 2015 PACER
14

ORDER re 11 Application for Leave to Appear Pro Hac Vice. The Court ADMITS Attorney Ossai Miazad for Katherine Moussouris, Holly Muenchow, and for Dana Piermarini, by Clerk William M McCool. No document associated with this docket entry, text only.NOTE TO COUNSEL: Local counsel agrees to sign all filings and to be prepared to handle the matter, including the trial thereof, in the event the applicant is unable to be present on any date scheduled by the court, pursuant to LCR 83.1(d).(DS) (Entered: 10/30/2015)

Oct. 30, 2015 PACER
15

ORDER re 12 Application for Leave to Appear Pro Hac Vice. The Court ADMITS Attorney Katrina L Eiland for Katherine Moussouris, Holly Muenchow, and for Dana Piermarini, by Clerk William M McCool. No document associated with this docket entry, text only.NOTE TO COUNSEL: Local counsel agrees to sign all filings and to be prepared to handle the matter, including the trial thereof, in the event the applicant is unable to be present on any date scheduled by the court, pursuant to LCR 83.1(d).(DS) (Entered: 10/30/2015)

Oct. 30, 2015 PACER
16

STIPULATION AND PROPOSED ORDER by parties (Attachments: # 1 Certificate of Service)(Parris, Mark) (Entered: 11/05/2015)

1 Certificate of Service

View on PACER

Nov. 5, 2015 PACER
17

STIPULATION AND ORDER; dft's responsive pleading due 11/12/15; dft's motion to be noted for 12/18/15, opposition due 12/7/15, reply due 12/18/15 by Judge James L. Robart. (RS) (Entered: 11/06/2015)

Nov. 6, 2015 PACER
18

ORDER REGARDING INITIAL DISCLOSURES AND JOINT STATUS REPORT Joint Status Report due by 1/8/2016, FRCP 26f Conference Deadline is 12/28/2015, Initial Disclosure Deadline is 1/8/2016, by Judge James L. Robart. (CC) (Entered: 11/09/2015)

Nov. 9, 2015 PACER
19

SCHEDULING ORDER REGARDING CLASS CERTIFICATION MOTION. Deadline to complete discovery on class certification - February 13, 2016. Deadline for Plaintiffs to file motion for class certification - March 16, 2016. by Judge James L. Robart. (CC) (Entered: 11/09/2015)

Nov. 9, 2015 PACER
20

APPLICATION OF ATTORNEY Michael Levin-Gesundheit FOR LEAVE TO APPEAR PRO HAC VICE for Plaintiff Katherine Moussouris (Fee Paid) Receipt No. 0981-4228760 (Lee, Sharon) (Entered: 11/12/2015)

Nov. 12, 2015 PACER
21

APPLICATION OF ATTORNEY Lynne C. Hermle FOR LEAVE TO APPEAR PRO HAC VICE for Defendant Microsoft Corporation (Fee Paid) Receipt No. 0981-4229211 (Attachments: # 1 Certificate of Service)(Parris, Mark) (Entered: 11/12/2015)

1 Certificate of Service

View on PACER

Nov. 12, 2015 RECAP
22

APPLICATION OF ATTORNEY Jessica R. Perry FOR LEAVE TO APPEAR PRO HAC VICE for Defendant Microsoft Corporation (Fee Paid) Receipt No. 0981-4229226 (Attachments: # 1 Certificate of Service)(Parris, Mark) (Entered: 11/12/2015)

1 Certificate of Service

View on PACER

Nov. 12, 2015 PACER
23

MOTION TO DISMISS FOR FAILURE TO STATE A CLAIM, STRIKE AND/OR FOR MORE DEFINITE STATEMENT by Defendant Microsoft Corporation. Oral Argument Requested. (Attachments: # 1 Proposed Order Granting Microsoft's Motion to Dismiss, Strike and/or for More Definite Statement) Noting Date 12/18/2015, (Parris, Mark) (Entered: 11/12/2015)

1 Proposed Order Granting Microsoft's Motion to Dismiss, Strike and/or for Mo

View on PACER

Nov. 12, 2015 PACER
24

CORPORATE DISCLOSURE STATEMENT Filed pursuant to Fed.R.Civ.P 7.1. Filed by Microsoft Corporation (Parris, Mark) (Entered: 11/12/2015)

Nov. 12, 2015 PACER
25

ORDER re 20 Application for Leave to Appear Pro Hac Vice. The Court ADMITS Attorney Michael Levin-Gesundheit for Katherine Moussouris, by Clerk William M McCool. No document associated with this docket entry, text only.NOTE TO COUNSEL: Local counsel agrees to sign all filings and to be prepared to handle the matter, including the trial thereof, in the event the applicant is unable to be present on any date scheduled by the court, pursuant to LCR 83.1(d).(DS) (Entered: 11/13/2015)

Nov. 13, 2015 PACER
26

ORDER re 21 Application for Leave to Appear Pro Hac Vice. The Court ADMITS Attorney Lynne C Hermie Lynne C. Hermle for Microsoft Corporation, by Clerk William M McCool. No document associated with this docket entry, text only.NOTE TO COUNSEL: Local counsel agrees to sign all filings and to be prepared to handle the matter, including the trial thereof, in the event the applicant is unable to be present on any date scheduled by the court, pursuant to LCR 83.1(d).(DS) Modified on 1/27/2016 (DS). (Entered: 11/13/2015)

Nov. 13, 2015 PACER
27

ORDER re 22 Application for Leave to Appear Pro Hac Vice. The Court ADMITS Attorney Jessica R Perry for Microsoft Corporation, by Clerk William M McCool. No document associated with this docket entry, text only.NOTE TO COUNSEL: Local counsel agrees to sign all filings and to be prepared to handle the matter, including the trial thereof, in the event the applicant is unable to be present on any date scheduled by the court, pursuant to LCR 83.1(d).(DS) (Entered: 11/13/2015)

Nov. 13, 2015 PACER
28

RESPONSE, by Plaintiffs Katherine Moussouris, Holly Muenchow, Dana Piermarini, to 23 MOTION TO DISMISS FOR FAILURE TO STATE A CLAIM, STRIKE AND/OR FOR MORE DEFINITE STATEMENT. Oral Argument Requested. (Lee, Sharon) (Entered: 12/07/2015)

Dec. 7, 2015 PACER
29

REPLY, filed by Defendant Microsoft Corporation, TO RESPONSE to 23 MOTION TO DISMISS FOR FAILURE TO STATE A CLAIM, STRIKE AND/OR FOR MORE DEFINITE STATEMENT (Parris, Mark) (Entered: 12/18/2015)

Dec. 18, 2015 PACER
30

REQUEST by Plaintiffs Katherine Moussouris, Holly Muenchow, Dana Piermarini for Judicial Notice re 28 Response to Motion (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit A)(Lee, Sharon) (Entered: 01/05/2016)

1 Exhibit A

View on PACER

Jan. 5, 2016 PACER
31

NOTICE of Association of Attorney by Michael C Subit on behalf of Plaintiffs Katherine Moussouris, Holly Muenchow, Dana Piermarini. (Subit, Michael) (Entered: 01/06/2016)

Jan. 6, 2016 PACER
32

JOINT STATUS REPORT signed by all parties (Parris, Mark) (Entered: 01/08/2016)

Jan. 8, 2016 PACER
33

MINUTE ORDER by Judge James L. Robart. Telephonic hearing regarding discovery dispute is set for 1/29/2016 at 09:00 AM before Judge James L. Robart. Briefs to be submitted by 12:00 p.m. on 1/25/2016. (PM) (Entered: 01/20/2016)

Jan. 20, 2016 PACER
34

PROPOSED ORDER (Unsigned) Stipulated Protective Order (Shaver, Anne) (Entered: 01/21/2016)

Jan. 21, 2016 PACER
35

MOTION for Discovery by Defendant Microsoft Corporation. Oral Argument Requested. (Attachments: # 1 Proposed Order Proposed Order Regarding Discovery Dispute) Noting Date 1/29/2016, (Parris, Mark) (Entered: 01/25/2016)

1 Proposed Order Proposed Order Regarding Discovery Dispute

View on PACER

Jan. 25, 2016 PACER
36

Plaintiffs' BRIEF Regarding 30(b)(6) Discovery Dispute by Plaintiffs Katherine Moussouris, Holly Muenchow, Dana Piermarini (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit A, # 2 Exhibit B, # 3 Exhibit C, # 4 Exhibit D)(Shaver, Anne) (Entered: 01/25/2016)

1 Exhibit A

View on PACER

2 Exhibit B

View on PACER

3 Exhibit C

View on PACER

4 Exhibit D

View on PACER

Jan. 25, 2016 PACER
37

DECLARATION of Jessica R. Perry In Support of Microsoft's Memorandum of Points and Authorities Re Discovery Dispute filed by Defendant Microsoft Corporation re 35 MOTION for Discovery (Parris, Mark) (Entered: 01/25/2016)

Jan. 25, 2016 PACER
38

DECLARATION of Martin Loughlin In Support of Microsoft's Memorandum of Points and Authorities re Discovery Dispute filed by Defendant Microsoft Corporation re 35 MOTION for Discovery (Parris, Mark) (Entered: 01/25/2016)

Jan. 25, 2016 PACER
39

DECLARATION of Larrissa Johnson in Support of Microsoft's Memorandum of Points and Authorities Re Discovery Dispute filed by Defendant Microsoft Corporation re 35 MOTION for Discovery (Parris, Mark) (Entered: 01/25/2016)

Jan. 25, 2016 PACER
40

DECLARATION of Shreejit Sugathan in Support of Microsoft's Memorandum of Points and Authorities Re Discovery Dispute filed by Defendant Microsoft Corporation re 35 MOTION for Discovery (Parris, Mark) (Entered: 01/25/2016)

Jan. 25, 2016 PACER
41

PRAECIPE re 37 Declaration of Jessica R. Perry in Support of Microsoft's Memorandum of Points and Authorities re Discovery Dispute by Defendant Microsoft Corporation (Parris, Mark) (Entered: 01/25/2016)

Jan. 25, 2016 PACER
42

APPLICATION OF ATTORNEY Wendy Butler Curtis FOR LEAVE TO APPEAR PRO HAC VICE for Defendant Microsoft Corporation (Fee Paid) Receipt No. 0981-4315415 (Parris, Mark) (Entered: 01/26/2016)

Jan. 26, 2016 PACER
43

APPLICATION OF ATTORNEY Lauri A. Damrell FOR LEAVE TO APPEAR PRO HAC VICE for Defendant Microsoft Corporation (Fee Paid) Receipt No. 0981-4315419 (Parris, Mark) (Entered: 01/26/2016)

Jan. 26, 2016 PACER
44

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE by Defendant Microsoft Corporation re 43 Application for Leave to Appear Pro Hac Vice, 42 Application for Leave to Appear Pro Hac Vice (Parris, Mark) (Entered: 01/26/2016)

Jan. 26, 2016 PACER
45

ORDER re 42 Application for Leave to Appear Pro Hac Vice. The Court ADMITS Attorney Wendy Butler Curtis for Microsoft Corporation, by Clerk William M McCool. No document associated with this docket entry, text only.NOTE TO COUNSEL: Local counsel agrees to sign all filings and to be prepared to handle the matter, including the trial thereof, in the event the applicant is unable to be present on any date scheduled by the court, pursuant to LCR 83.1(d).(DS) (Entered: 01/27/2016)

Jan. 27, 2016 PACER
46

ORDER re 43 Application for Leave to Appear Pro Hac Vice. The Court ADMITS Attorney Lauri A Damrell for Microsoft Corporation, by Clerk William M McCool. No document associated with this docket entry, text only.NOTE TO COUNSEL: Local counsel agrees to sign all filings and to be prepared to handle the matter, including the trial thereof, in the event the applicant is unable to be present on any date scheduled by the court, pursuant to LCR 83.1(d).(DS) (Entered: 01/27/2016)

Jan. 27, 2016 PACER
47

NOTICE of Supplemental Filing re 36 Brief ; filed by Plaintiffs Katherine Moussouris, Holly Muenchow, Dana Piermarini. (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit)(Shaver, Anne) (Entered: 01/28/2016)

1 Exhibit

View on PACER

Jan. 28, 2016 PACER
48

STIPULATED PROTECTIVE ORDER by Judge James L. Robart. (PM) (Entered: 01/29/2016)

Jan. 29, 2016 PACER
49

MINUTE ENTRY for proceedings held before Judge James L. Robart- Dep Clerk: Casey Condon; Pla Counsel: Kelly Dermody, Anne Shaver, Adam Klein, Michael Subit; Def Counsel: Mark Parris, Jessica Perry, Wendy Curtis, Lauri Damrell; CR: Nancy Bauer; Telephone Conference held on 1/29/2016. The court quashes both pending deposition notices without prejudice to future discovery. The court strikes the schedule for class discovery and the motion for class certification, Dkt. # 19, until the court rules on the motion to dismiss, Dkt. # 23. The court rules the motion for discovery is moot, Dkt. #35. Within ten (10) days of the court's ruling on the motion to dismiss, the court directs counsel to submit an agreed schedule on class discovery and the motion for class certification. In the event the parties cannot agree, each side may propose a schedule and the court will rule. (CC) (Entered: 01/29/2016)

Jan. 29, 2016 PACER
50

STIPULATION AND PROPOSED ORDER Concerning Production of Electronically Stored Information by parties (Attachments: # 1 Certificate of Service)(Parris, Mark) (Entered: 02/08/2016)

1 Certificate of Service

View on PACER

Feb. 8, 2016 PACER
51

STIPULATION AND ORDER concerning production of electronically stored information by Judge James L. Robart. (RS) (Entered: 02/10/2016)

Feb. 10, 2016 PACER
52

ORDER granting in part and denying in part Microsoft's 23 Motion to Dismiss for Failure to State a Claim; court grants plaintiffs 30 days to amend their complaint and directs parties to file a proposed class discovery and certification schedule within 15 days by Judge James L. Robart.(RS) (Entered: 03/08/2016)

March 7, 2016 PACER
53

STIPULATION AND PROPOSED ORDER on class discovery and certification schedule by parties (Shaver, Anne) (Entered: 03/23/2016)

March 23, 2016 PACER
54

MINUTE ORDER by Judge James L. Robart. The court ORDERS that Plaintiffs file their class certification motion so as to note no later than 10/7/2016. The deadline to complete discovery on class certification shall be 8/12/2016.(AD) (Entered: 03/25/2016)

March 25, 2016 PACER
55

Second AMENDED COMPLAINT against defendant(s) Microsoft Corporation with JURY DEMAND, filed by Dana Piermarini, Katherine Moussouris, Holly Muenchow. (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit A)(Shaver, Anne) (Entered: 04/06/2016)

1 Exhibit A

View on PACER

April 6, 2016 RECAP
56

APPLICATION OF ATTORNEY Yaman Salahi FOR LEAVE TO APPEAR PRO HAC VICE for Plaintiffs Katherine Moussouris, Holly Muenchow, Dana Piermarini (Fee Paid) Receipt No. 0981-4405004 (Lee, Sharon) (Entered: 04/07/2016)

April 7, 2016 PACER
57

ORDER re 56 Application for Leave to Appear Pro Hac Vice. The Court ADMITS Attorney Yaman Salahi for Katherine Moussouris, Holly Muenchow, and for Dana Piermarini, by Clerk William M McCool. No document associated with this docket entry, text only.NOTE TO COUNSEL: Local counsel agrees to sign all filings and to be prepared to handle the matter, including the trial thereof, in the event the applicant is unable to be present on any date scheduled by the court, pursuant to LCR 83.1(d).(DS) (Entered: 04/07/2016)

April 7, 2016 PACER
58

APPLICATION OF ATTORNEY Elizabeth V. Stork FOR LEAVE TO APPEAR PRO HAC VICE for Plaintiffs Katherine Moussouris, Holly Muenchow, Dana Piermarini (Fee Paid) Receipt No. 0981-4405598 (Lee, Sharon) (Entered: 04/07/2016)

April 7, 2016 PACER
59

ORDER re 58 Application for Leave to Appear Pro Hac Vice. The Court ADMITS Attorney Elizabeth V Stork for Katherine Moussouris, Holly Muenchow, and for Dana Piermarini, by Clerk William M McCool. No document associated with this docket entry, text only.NOTE TO COUNSEL: Local counsel agrees to sign all filings and to be prepared to handle the matter, including the trial thereof, in the event the applicant is unable to be present on any date scheduled by the court, pursuant to LCR 83.1(d).(DS) (Entered: 04/07/2016)

April 7, 2016 PACER
60

MINUTE ORDER by Judge James L. Robart setting a telephone hearing for 5/3/2016 at 02:00 PM regarding a discovery dispute. Each party to submit up to a 4 page brief by 5:00 PM on 4/28/2016. (PM) (Entered: 04/20/2016)

April 20, 2016 PACER
61

ANSWER to 55 Amended Complaint by Microsoft Corporation.(Parris, Mark) (Entered: 04/25/2016)

April 25, 2016 PACER
62

MOTION to Dismiss Plaintiffs' Disparate Impact Claims in Second Amended Complaint by Defendant Microsoft Corporation. Oral Argument Requested. (Attachments: # 1 Proposed Order [Proposed] Order Granting Microsoft's Motion to Dismiss Plaintiffs' Disparate Impact Claims In Second Amended Complaint) Noting Date 5/20/2016, (Parris, Mark) (Entered: 04/25/2016)

1 Proposed Order [Proposed] Order Granting Microsoft's Motion to Dismiss Plai

View on PACER

April 25, 2016 PACER
63

REQUEST by Defendant Microsoft Corporation for Judicial Notice in Support of Motion to Dismiss Plaintiffs' Disparate Impact Claims in Second Amended Complaint re 62 MOTION to Dismiss Plaintiffs' Disparate Impact Claims in Second Amended Complaint (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit Exhibit A to Request for Judicial Notice, # 2 Exhibit Exhibit B to Request for Judicial Notice, # 3 Exhibit Exhibit C to Request for Judicial Notice, # 4 Exhibit Exhibit D to Request for Judicial Notice)(Parris, Mark) (Entered: 04/25/2016)

1 Exhibit Exhibit A to Request for Judicial Notice

View on PACER

2 Exhibit Exhibit B to Request for Judicial Notice

View on PACER

3 Exhibit Exhibit C to Request for Judicial Notice

View on PACER

4 Exhibit Exhibit D to Request for Judicial Notice

View on PACER

April 25, 2016 PACER
64

MOTION to Compel Responses to Microsoft's First Set of Interrogatories to Plaintiff Holly Muenchow by Defendant Microsoft Corporation. Oral Argument Requested. Noting Date 5/3/2016, (Parris, Mark) (Entered: 04/28/2016)

April 28, 2016 PACER
65

DECLARATION of Lauri A. Damrell filed by Defendant Microsoft Corporation re 64 MOTION to Compel Responses to Microsoft's First Set of Interrogatories to Plaintiff Holly Muenchow (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit A-C)(Parris, Mark) (Entered: 04/28/2016)

1 Exhibit A-C

View on PACER

April 28, 2016 PACER
66

PROPOSED ORDER (Unsigned) re 64 MOTION to Compel Responses to Microsoft's First Set of Interrogatories to Plaintiff Holly Muenchow (Parris, Mark) (Entered: 04/28/2016)

April 28, 2016 PACER
67

MEMORANDUM of Law re Contention Interrogatories Discovery Dispute by Plaintiffs Katherine Moussouris, Holly Muenchow, Dana Piermarini (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit A, # 2 Exhibit B, # 3 Exhibit C)(Levin-Gesundheit, Michael) (Entered: 04/28/2016)

1 Exhibit A

View on PACER

2 Exhibit B

View on PACER

3 Exhibit C

View on PACER

April 28, 2016 PACER
68

APPLICATION OF ATTORNEY Rachel Geman FOR LEAVE TO APPEAR PRO HAC VICE by Plaintiffs Katherine Moussouris, Holly Muenchow, Dana Piermarini Receipt No. 0981-4434639 (Lee, Sharon) (Entered: 05/02/2016)

May 2, 2016 PACER
69

ORDER re 68 Application. The Court ADMITS Attorney Rachel J Geman for Katherine Moussouris, Holly Muenchow, and for Dana Piermarini, by Clerk William M McCool. No document associated with this docket entry, text only.NOTE TO COUNSEL: Local counsel agrees to sign all filings and to be prepared to handle the matter, including the trial thereof, in the event the applicant is unable to be present on any date scheduled by the court, pursuant to LCR 83.1(d).(DS) (Entered: 05/02/2016)

May 2, 2016 PACER
70

MINUTE ENTRY for proceedings held before Judge James L. Robart- Dep Clerk: Casey Condon; Pla Counsel: Kelly Dermody, Adam Klein, Anne Shaver, Michael Subit; Def Counsel: Lauri Damrell, Mark Parris; CR: Nancy Bauer; Telephone Conference held on 5/3/2016. The court hears from counsel on the Motion to Compel, Dkt. #64. For the reasons stated on the record, the court grants the motion. The court orders Plaintiff Holly Muenchow to provide responses to Microsoft's First Set of Interrogatories by noon, Wednesday, May 18, 2016. (CC) (Entered: 05/03/2016)

May 3, 2016 PACER
71

RESPONSE, by Plaintiffs Katherine Moussouris, Holly Muenchow, Dana Piermarini, to 62 MOTION to Dismiss Plaintiffs' Disparate Impact Claims in Second Amended Complaint. Oral Argument Requested. (Levin-Gesundheit, Michael) (Entered: 05/16/2016)

May 16, 2016 PACER
72

DECLARATION of Anne B. Shaver ISO Plaintiffs' Opposition to Motion to Dismiss filed by Plaintiffs Katherine Moussouris, Holly Muenchow, Dana Piermarini re 62 MOTION to Dismiss Plaintiffs' Disparate Impact Claims in Second Amended Complaint (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit A, # 2 Exhibit B, # 3 Exhibit C)(Levin-Gesundheit, Michael) (Entered: 05/16/2016)

1 Exhibit A

View on PACER

2 Exhibit B

View on PACER

3 Exhibit C

View on PACER

May 16, 2016 PACER
73

DECLARATION of Holly Muenchow ISO Plaintiffs' Opposition to Motion to Dismiss filed by Plaintiffs Katherine Moussouris, Holly Muenchow, Dana Piermarini re 62 MOTION to Dismiss Plaintiffs' Disparate Impact Claims in Second Amended Complaint (Levin-Gesundheit, Michael) (Entered: 05/16/2016)

May 16, 2016 PACER
74

REPLY, filed by Defendant Microsoft Corporation, TO RESPONSE to 62 MOTION to Dismiss Plaintiffs' Disparate Impact Claims in Second Amended Complaint (Parris, Mark) (Entered: 05/20/2016)

May 20, 2016 PACER
75

REQUEST by Defendant Microsoft Corporation for Judicial Notice re 74 Reply to Response to Motion (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit A, # 2 Exhibit B, # 3 Exhibit C, # 4 Exhibit D)(Parris, Mark) (Entered: 05/20/2016)

1 Exhibit A

View on PACER

2 Exhibit B

View on PACER

3 Exhibit C

View on PACER

4 Exhibit D

View on PACER

May 20, 2016 PACER
76

DECLARATION of Lauri A. Damrell in Support of Reply filed by Defendant Microsoft Corporation re 62 MOTION to Dismiss Plaintiffs' Disparate Impact Claims in Second Amended Complaint (Parris, Mark) (Entered: 05/20/2016)

May 20, 2016 PACER

Set/Reset Hearings: Counsel for Plaintiffs and counsel for Defendant contacted the court to request a hearing on their dispute over the temporal scope of discovery. Plaintiffs and Defendant are each to submit a brief on that issue, not to exceed five (5) pages, no later than 12:00 p.m. on Wednesday, June 1, 2016. The court will then hold an in-court hearing on the issue at 11:00 a.m. on Monday, June 6, 2016, in Courtroom 14106.(CC)

May 23, 2016 PACER

Set/Reset Hearings

May 23, 2016 PACER
77

APPLICATION OF ATTORNEY Cara B. Chomski FOR LEAVE TO APPEAR PRO HAC VICE for Plaintiffs Katherine Moussouris, Holly Muenchow, Dana Piermarini (Fee Paid) Receipt No. 0981-4465979 (Lee, Sharon) (Entered: 05/26/2016)

May 26, 2016 PACER
78

ORDER re 77 Application for Leave to Appear Pro Hac Vice. The Court ADMITS Attorney Cara B Chomski for plaintiffs Katherine Moussouris, Holly Muenchow,and Dana Piermarini, by Clerk William M McCool. No document associated with this docket entry, text only.NOTE TO COUNSEL: Local counsel agrees to sign all filings and to be prepared to handle the matter, including the trial thereof, in the event the applicant is unable to be present on any date scheduled by the court, pursuant to LCR 83.1(d).(CDA) (Entered: 05/27/2016)

May 27, 2016 PACER
79

MEMORANDUM re Set/Reset Hearings, on Dispute Regarding Temporal Scope of Class & Discovery by Defendant Microsoft Corporation (Attachments: # 1 Proposed Order)(Parris, Mark) (Entered: 06/01/2016)

1 Proposed Order

View on PACER

June 1, 2016 PACER
80

Plaintiffs' BRIEF Regarding Temporal Scope Discovery Dispute by Plaintiffs Katherine Moussouris, Holly Muenchow, Dana Piermarini (Shaver, Anne) (Entered: 06/01/2016)

June 1, 2016 PACER
81

DECLARATION of Lauri A. Damrell re 79 Memorandum by Defendant Microsoft Corporation (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit A, # 2 Exhibit B)(Parris, Mark) (Entered: 06/01/2016)

1 Exhibit A

View on PACER

2 Exhibit B

View on PACER

June 1, 2016 PACER
82

MINUTE ENTRY for proceedings held before Judge James L. Robart- Dep Clerk: Casey Condon; Pla Counsel: Kelly Dermody, Michael Subit; Def Counsel: Mark Parris; CR: Nickie Drury; Status Hearing held on 6/6/2016. The court, treating this dispute as a matter of discovery and reserving judgment on the merits, holds that the the class discovery period shall begin on January 1, 2010. (CC) (Entered: 06/06/2016)

June 6, 2016 PACER
83

NOTICE OF FILING OF OFFICIAL TRANSCRIPT of Motion Hearing held on 6/6/2016 before Judge James L. Robart.Parties have seven (7) calendar days to file with the court a Notice of Intent to Request Redaction of this transcript. If no such Notice is filed, the transcript may be made remotely electronically available to the public without redaction after 90 calendar days.Transcript may be viewed at the court public terminal or purchased through the Court Reporter/Transcriber before the deadline for Release of Transcript Restriction. After that date it may be obtained through PACER. Information regarding the policy can be found on the court's website at www.wawd.uscourts.gov.To purchase a copy of the transcript, contact court reporter Nickoline Drury, nickoline_drury@wawd.uscourts.gov, 206-370-8508. Release of Transcript Restriction set for 9/8/2016, (ND) (Entered: 06/10/2016)

June 10, 2016 PACER

Set/Reset Hearings: Counsel for Plaintiffs and counsel for Defendants contacted the court to request a hearing on two separate discovery disputes. Counsel may file additional briefing, not to exceed 12 pages, on the two discovery issues raised with the court. The briefs shall be filed by noon, Thursday, July 7, 2016. A Telephone Conference is scheduled Monday, July 18, 2016 at 3:30 p.m. before Judge James L. Robart. (CC)

June 24, 2016 PACER

Set/Reset Hearings

June 24, 2016 PACER

Counsel for Plaintiffs and counsel for Defendant contacted the court, and Defendants requested additional briefing on a separate merits issue to be taken up in conjunction with the court's July 18, 2016, telephone conference. Plaintiffs opposed that request. The court denies Defendant's request for additional briefing on the issue and will take up the parties' proposals for how to address the issue at the July 18, 2016, telephonic hearing. (VE)

July 7, 2016 PACER

Docket Annotation

July 7, 2016 PACER
84

MEMORANDUM Plaintiffs Memorandum Of Law Regarding Internal Employee Complaints And Company Audits Discovery Dispute by Plaintiffs Katherine Moussouris, Holly Muenchow, Dana Piermarini (Shaver, Anne) (Entered: 07/07/2016)

July 7, 2016 PACER
85

DECLARATION of YAMAN SALAHI re 84 Memorandum by Plaintiffs Katherine Moussouris, Holly Muenchow, Dana Piermarini (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit A, # 2 Exhibit B, # 3 Exhibit C, # 4 Exhibit D, # 5 Exhibit E, # 6 Exhibit F, # 7 Exhibit G, # 8 Exhibit H, # 9 Exhibit I, # 10 Exhibit J, # 11 Exhibit K, # 12 Exhibit L, # 13 Exhibit M, # 14 Exhibit N, # 15 Exhibit O, # 16 Exhibit P, # 17 Exhibit Q, # 18 Exhibit R, # 19 Exhibit S, # 20 Exhibit T, # 21 Exhibit U)(Shaver, Anne) (Entered: 07/07/2016)

1 Exhibit A

View on PACER

2 Exhibit B

View on PACER

3 Exhibit C

View on PACER

4 Exhibit D

View on PACER

5 Exhibit E

View on PACER

6 Exhibit F

View on PACER

7 Exhibit G

View on PACER

8 Exhibit H

View on PACER

9 Exhibit I

View on PACER

10 Exhibit J

View on PACER

11 Exhibit K

View on PACER

12 Exhibit L

View on PACER

13 Exhibit M

View on PACER

14 Exhibit N

View on PACER

15 Exhibit O

View on PACER

16 Exhibit P

View on PACER

17 Exhibit Q

View on PACER

18 Exhibit R

View on PACER

19 Exhibit S

View on PACER

20 Exhibit T

View on PACER

21 Exhibit U

View on PACER

July 7, 2016 PACER
86

MOTION to Quash Plaintiffs' Request for Internal Investigation Files and Approve Use of a Categorical Privilege Log by Defendant Microsoft Corporation. (Attachments: # 1 Proposed Order) Noting Date 7/18/2016, (Parris, Mark) (Entered: 07/07/2016)

1 Proposed Order

View on PACER

July 7, 2016 RECAP
87

DECLARATION of Lauri A. Damrell filed by Defendant Microsoft Corporation re 86 MOTION to Quash Plaintiffs' Request for Internal Investigation Files and Approve Use of a Categorical Privilege Log (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit A, # 2 Exhibit B, # 3 Exhibit C, # 4 Exhibit D, # 5 Exhibit E, # 6 Exhibit F, # 7 Exhibit G, # 8 Exhibit H, # 9 Exhibit I, # 10 Exhibit J)(Parris, Mark) (Entered: 07/07/2016)

1 Exhibit A

View on PACER

2 Exhibit B

View on PACER

3 Exhibit C

View on PACER

4 Exhibit D

View on PACER

5 Exhibit E

View on PACER

6 Exhibit F

View on PACER

7 Exhibit G

View on PACER

8 Exhibit H

View on PACER

9 Exhibit I

View on PACER

10 Exhibit J

View on PACER

July 7, 2016 PACER

Set/Reset Hearings: Counsel for Plaintiffs and counsel for Defendant contacted the court regarding a miscommunication related to the pending discovery disputes. The court STRIKES the July 18, 2016, telephone conference on those disputes and reschedules that telephone conference for Tuesday, July 26, 2016, at 4:00 PM. The court GRANTS each party an additional six (6) pages of briefing on the discovery disputes, to be submitted no later than 12:00 PM on Wednesday, July 20, 2016. (RS)

July 12, 2016 PACER

Set/Reset Hearings

July 12, 2016 PACER

Set/Reset Hearings: The Telephone Conference scheduled July 26, 2016 is continued to Tuesday, August 2, 2016 at 9:00 a.m. before Judge James L. Robart. (CC)

July 14, 2016 PACER

Set/Reset Hearings

July 14, 2016 PACER
88

Supplemental MOTION to Quash Plaintiffs' Request for Internal Analyses and Approve Use of Categorical Privilege Log by Defendant Microsoft Corporation. Oral Argument Requested. (Attachments: # 1 Proposed Order) Noting Date 8/2/2016, (Parris, Mark) (Entered: 07/20/2016)

1 Proposed Order

View on PACER

July 20, 2016 PACER

State / Territory: Washington

Case Type(s):

Equal Employment

Key Dates

Filing Date: Sept. 16, 2015

Case Ongoing: Yes

Plaintiffs

Plaintiff Description:

Female technical employees of Microsoft.

Plaintiff Type(s):

Private Plaintiff

Attorney Organizations:

Outten & Golden

Public Interest Lawyer: No

Filed Pro Se: No

Class Action Sought: Yes

Class Action Outcome: Denied

Defendants

Microsoft Corporation, Private Entity/Person

Defendant Type(s):

Retailer

Case Details

Causes of Action:

State law

Title VII (including PDA), 42 U.S.C. § 2000e

State Anti-Discrimination Law

Availably Documents:

Trial Court Docket

Complaint (any)

Outcome

Prevailing Party: Defendant

Nature of Relief:

None

Source of Relief:

None

Issues

General:

Disparate Impact

Disparate Treatment

Retaliation

Discrimination-area:

Pay / Benefits

Promotion

Discrimination-basis:

Sex discrimination

Affected Gender:

Female