Case: EEOC v. SIERRA ALUMINUM

2:06-cv-04158 | U.S. District Court for the Central District of California

Filed Date: June 29, 2006

Closed Date: 2010

Clearinghouse coding complete

Case Summary

On June 29, 2006, the Los Angeles office of the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission filed a lawsuit under Title VII against Sierra Aluminum in the U.S. District Court for the Central District of California. The EEOC alleged that the defendants had violated the complainant's rights by subjecting her to harassment. We have no further information on the specific allegations made, since we have only the docket and the consent decree in this case.On August 2, 2007, the parties settled the case…

On June 29, 2006, the Los Angeles office of the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission filed a lawsuit under Title VII against Sierra Aluminum in the U.S. District Court for the Central District of California. The EEOC alleged that the defendants had violated the complainant's rights by subjecting her to harassment. We have no further information on the specific allegations made, since we have only the docket and the consent decree in this case.

On August 2, 2007, the parties settled the case. Fifteen days later, the court approved their consent decree and closed the case. Under the terms of the consent decree, the defendants agreed to pay $200,000 to resolve the complaint. The defendants were prohibited from discriminating or retaliating against any employees violation of Title VII, and they were required to develop an anti-discrimination policy to post at the place of business and distribute to all employees. The defendants were required to include compliance with EEO policies as a measure of performance in each employee's annual performance review. The defendants agreed to retain an Equal Employment Opportunity Commission consultant to ensure that they comply with the terms of the decree. Defendants were required to provide a mandatory intensive three-hour EEO training program for all management and human resources personnel each year. All other employees were to be required to attend a similar program for one hour each year. The defendants agreed to form a complaint process that provides employees with accessible and confidential avenues of complaint. This process was to allow the employees to report their complaints to someone outside their chain of management, provide confidentiality for all complaints, involve timely investigation of all complaints, and allow for remedial action to be taken.

The EEOC was allowed to send a representative to observe the EEO training that would be provided to all of the defendant's employees. Within 90 days, the defendants were to provide a copy of all policies and procedures formulated as a result of the consent decree, as well as certification of the mandatory training that they were to require of all employees. In addition, the defendants were to also provide semiannual reports of all complaints and the results of the ensuing investigations. The defendants were required to maintain a record-keeping procedure that provided for centralized tracking of all complaints and the monitoring of such complaints to prevent discrimination. This included all documents generated as a result of a complaint of harassment. The terms of the agreement were to run for 3 years. The docket sheet does not show any further enforcement; the case was presumably closed in 2010.

Summary Authors

Kristen Sagar (4/28/2008)

People

For PACER's information on parties and their attorneys, see: https://www.courtlistener.com/docket/4143405/parties/us-equal-employment-opportunity-commission-v-sierra-aluminum-company/


Attorneys(s) for Plaintiff

Park, Anna Y. (California)

Viramontes, Victor (California)

Attorneys(s) for Defendant

Griffin, Gerald A (California)

Scalabrini, Gary Edward (California)

Attorneys(s) for Plaintiff

Park, Anna Y. (California)

Viramontes, Victor (California)

Attorneys(s) for Defendant

Griffin, Gerald A (California)

Scalabrini, Gary Edward (California)

Documents in the Clearinghouse

Document

Docket (PACER)

EEOC v. Sierra Aluminum Company

Aug. 17, 2007 Docket
15

[Proposed] Consent Decree; Order

EEOC v. Sierra Aluminum Company

Aug. 17, 2007 Settlement Agreement

Docket

See docket on RECAP: https://www.courtlistener.com/docket/4143405/us-equal-employment-opportunity-commission-v-sierra-aluminum-company/

Last updated May 12, 2022, 8 p.m.

ECF Number Description Date Link
1

COMPLAINT against defendant Sierra Aluminum Company.(No fee required) Jury Demanded., filed by plaintiff US Equal Employment Opportunity Commission.(rrey, ) (Entered: 07/07/2006)

June 29, 2006 PACER
2

CERTIFICATION of Interested Parties filed by Plaintiff US Equal Employment Opportunity Commission. (rrey, ) (Entered: 07/07/2006)

June 29, 2006 PACER
3

INITIAL ORDER FOLLOWING FILING OF COMPLAINT ASSIGNED TO Judge A. Howard Matz. Counsel for plaintiff shall serve this Order an all Defendant and/or their counsel along with the summons and complaint, or if that is not practicable as soon as possible thereafter. If this Case was assigned to this court after being removed from state court, the defendant who removed the case shall serve this order on all other parties. (pbap, ) (Entered: 07/10/2006)

July 5, 2006 PACER
4

WAIVER OF SERVICE Returned Executed filed by plaintiff US Equal Employment Opportunity Commission. upon Sierra Aluminum Company waiver sent by Plaintiff on 8/5/2006, answer due 10/4/2006. Waiver of Service signed by Gerald Giffin attorney on behalf of Sierra Aluminum Company. (pbap, ) (Entered: 08/21/2006)

Aug. 16, 2006 PACER
5

NOTICE OF DISCREPANCY AND ORDER: by Judge A. Howard Matz, ORDERING Answer submitted by Defendant Sierra Aluminum Company received on 9/11/06 is not to be filed but instead rejected. Denial based on: No Certification of Interested Parties and or no copies.(pbap, ) (Entered: 09/15/2006)

Sept. 14, 2006 PACER
6

ANSWER to Complaint - (Discovery) 1 filed by defendant Sierra Aluminum Company.(pbap, ) (Entered: 09/18/2006)

Sept. 15, 2006 PACER
7

Certification of Interested Parties Pursuant to Local Rule 7.1-1 and FED.R.CIV.P. Rule 7.1(A) filed by Defendant Sierra Aluminum Company. (pbap, ) (Entered: 09/18/2006)

Sept. 15, 2006 PACER
8

ORDER SETTING RULE 26(f) SCHEDULING CONFERENCE by Judge A. Howard Mat: If plaintiff has not already served the complaint (or any amendment thereto) on all defendants, plaintiff shall promptly do so and shall file proofs of service within three days thereafter. Defendants also shall timely serve and file their responsive pleadings and file proofs of service within three days thereafter. Rule 26 Meeting Report due by 11/6/06. Scheduling Conference set for 11/13/06 at 1:30 p.m. before Judge A. Howard Matz.(smo, ) (Entered: 10/12/2006)

Oct. 12, 2006 PACER
10

JOINT Rule 26(f) Report filed; estimated length of trial 5-6 days. (ir, ) (Entered: 11/21/2006)

Nov. 6, 2006 PACER
9

SCHEDULING AND CASE MANAGEMENT ORDER by Judge A. Howard Matz that the Court schedule of trial and pretrial date as following: Jury Trial (Estimated length 5 days) set for 8/21/2007 at 08:00 AM before Honorable A. Howard Matz. File Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law and Summaries of Direct Testimony. Final Pretrial Conference; Hearing on Motions in Limine; File Agreed Upon Set of Jury Instructions and Verdict Forms and Joint Statement re Disputed Instructions and Verdict Forms; File Proposed Voir Dire Qs and Agreed-to Statement of Case at 11:00 AM on 8/6/2007 before Honorable A Howard Matz. Lodge Pretrial Conference Order; Memo of Contentions of Fact and Law; Exhibit List; Witness Lists; Status Report re Settlement due by 7/23/2007. Last day for hand-serving Motions in Limine on 7/9/2007; Last Day to Meet Before Final Pretrial Conference (L.R. 16-2) 6/25/2007. Last day for hearing Motions at 10:00 AM on 6/25/2007. Last day for hand-serving motions and filing (other than Motions in Limine) due 5/29/2007. None-expert Discovery cut-off 5/19/2007. ADDITIONAL MATTERS TO BE DETERMINED AT SCHEDULING CONFERENCE: Expert discovery cut-off on 7/9/2007. Rebuttal Expert Witness Disclosure 6/18/2007. Opening Expert Witness Disclosure [See FRCP 26(A)(2)] 5/21/2007. Last date to conduct settlement conference is 5/21/2007. Last day to amend pleadings or add parties due by 2/5/2007. (jp) (Entered: 11/14/2006)

Nov. 13, 2006 PACER
11

MINUTES OF Scheduling Conference held before Judge A. Howard Matz: Court orders the dates as indicated on Scheduling and Case Management Order filed this date and accepts the parties' designation of L.R. 16-14: Settlement Procedure No. 2. Upon selection, plaintiff shall notify the settlement officer immediately of the Court's referral and presumptive schedule and file a status report with this Court confirming same. At the conclusion of the mediation, plaintiff shall file another status report notifying the Court of the outcome.Court Reporter: Leslie A. King. (smo, ) (Entered: 11/22/2006)

Nov. 13, 2006 PACER
12

ORDER OF THE CHIEF JUDGE (#07-027) approved by Chief District Judge Alicemarie H. Stotler. Pursuant to the recommended procedure adopted by the Court for the Creation of Calendar of Judge Philip S. Gutierrez, this case is transfered from Judge A. Howard Matz to the calendar of Judge Philip S. Gutierrez for all further proceedings. The case number will now reflect the initials of the transferee Judge CV 06-4158 PSG (CTx).(rn, ) (Entered: 02/27/2007)

Feb. 22, 2007 PACER
13

MINUTES OF PROCEEDINGSIN CHAMBERS ORDER held before Judge Philip S. Gutierrez. Please Take Notice: This action has been reassigned to the Honorable Philip S. Gutierrez, U.S. District Judge. Please substitute the initials PSG in place of the initials AHM. The case number will now read: CV 06-4158-PSG(CTx). Court Trial set for 9/4/2007 09:00 AM.Court Reporter: not reported. Set Hearings: Jury Trial set for 8/21/2007 09:00 AM. Pretrial Conference set for 8/6/2007 03:00 PM.Court Reporter: not reported. (pbap, ) (Entered: 03/02/2007)

Feb. 28, 2007 PACER
14

NOTICE OF SETTLEMENT AND JOING STIPULATION AND ORDER by Judge Philip S. Gutierrez to Continue Pretrial Conference set for 8/6/07 to 8/17/2007 09:30 AM.(pbap) (Entered: 08/03/2007)

Aug. 2, 2007 PACER
15

CONSENT JUDGMENT by Judge Philip S. Gutierrez: This decree fully and completely resolves all issues, claims and allegations by the EEOC against Sierra Aluminum Co. The court has jurisdiction over the parties and subject matter of this lawsuit.Sierra Aluminum Co shall pay a total of $200,000.00 to resolve this action. The EEOC shall designate the $200,000.00 as compensatory damages. (See order for further details) ( MD JS-6. Case Terminated )(shb) (Entered: 08/21/2007)

Aug. 17, 2007 RECAP

State / Territory: California

Case Type(s):

Equal Employment

Special Collection(s):

EEOC Study — in sample

Key Dates

Filing Date: June 29, 2006

Closing Date: 2010

Case Ongoing: No

Plaintiffs

Plaintiff Description:

Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, on behalf of one or more workers.

Plaintiff Type(s):

EEOC Plaintiff

Attorney Organizations:

EEOC

Public Interest Lawyer: Yes

Filed Pro Se: No

Class Action Sought: No

Class Action Outcome: Not sought

Defendants

Sierra Aluminum Company, Private Entity/Person

Case Details

Causes of Action:

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

Availably Documents:

Trial Court Docket

Monetary Relief

Injunctive (or Injunctive-like) Relief

Outcome

Prevailing Party: Plaintiff

Nature of Relief:

Injunction / Injunctive-like Settlement

Damages

Source of Relief:

Settlement

Form of Settlement:

Court Approved Settlement or Consent Decree

Amount Defendant Pays: 200000

Order Duration: 2007 - 2010

Content of Injunction:

Develop anti-discrimination policy

Discrimination Prohibition

Retaliation Prohibition

Other requirements regarding hiring, promotion, retention

Provide antidiscrimination training

Post/Distribute Notice of Rights / EE Law

Recordkeeping

Implement complaint/dispute resolution process

Reporting

Monitoring

Issues

General:

Disparate Treatment

Retaliation

EEOC-centric:

Direct Suit on Merits