Case: EEOC v. InteliData Technologies, Corp.

1:04-cv-01149 | U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia

Filed Date: Sept. 29, 2004

Closed Date: May 19, 2005

Clearinghouse coding complete

Case Summary

EEOC's Richmond, VA office filed this Title VII sexual discrimination lawsuit against the defendant, Intelidata Technologies, Inc. in the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia (Alexandria) on 09/29/2004. The defendant is a Reston, VA-based provider of online banking software. The company's president/CEO regularly made inappropriate and offensive comments after learning that a female regional sales manager was pregnant. The female manager did not intervene in the lawsuit or file a separate lawsuit.

Before filing an answer to the complaint,the defendant filed a motion to dismiss or a motion for summary judgment. The district court judge Claude M. Hilton denied the motion. The parties settled two months later and a consent decree was entered on 05/19/2005.

Under the consent decree, the defendant agreed to pay the female manager $59,000. The defendant was also prohibited from sex discrimination in the future.

Summary Authors

Yin Zheng (7/6/2007)

People

For PACER's information on parties and their attorneys, see: https://www.courtlistener.com/docket/11966714/parties/equal-employment-v-intelidata/

Judge(s)

Hilton, Claude M. (Virginia)

Attorney for Plaintiff

Caldwell, Stacey Turner (Virginia)

Attorney for Defendant

Lalik, Elizabeth A. (Virginia)

Judge(s)

Hilton, Claude M. (Virginia)

Attorney for Plaintiff

Caldwell, Stacey Turner (Virginia)

Attorney for Defendant

Lalik, Elizabeth A. (Virginia)

Attorney Contact Information via CourtListener

Documents in the Clearinghouse

Documents in this case

1:04-cv-01149	Docket EEOC v. Intelidata Technologies, Corp.	May 19, 2005	May 19, 2005 Docket
1:04-cv-01149	EEOC Annual Report EEOC v. Intelidata Technologies Corp No Court	Sept. 30, 2005	Sept. 30, 2005 Press Release

show / hide documents

Resources

Resources related to this case
Title	Description		External URL Date / External URL
Under the Radar: Visibility and the Effects of Discrimination Lawsuits in Small and Large Firms Carly Knight, Frank Dobbin, Alexandra Kalev	Research on how discrimination lawsuits affect corporate diversity has yielded mixed results. Qualitative studies highlight the limited efficacy of lawsuits in the typical workplace, finding that lit…	March 2022	April 1, 2022 https://cris.tau.ac.il/...

show / hide resources

Docket

See docket on RECAP: https://www.courtlistener.com/docket/11966714/equal-employment-v-intelidata/

Last updated Sept. 30, 2026, 1:14 a.m.

Docket for: Equal Employment v. Intelidata

ECF Number	Date	Description	Link
1	Sept. 29, 2004	COMPLAINT; jury demand (otho) Modified on 10/02/2004 (Entered: 09/29/2004)	RECAP
	Sept. 29, 2004	CASE REFERRED to Mag Judge Thomas R. Jones Jr. (otho) (Entered: 09/29/2004)	PACER
	Sept. 29, 2004	Jury Trial Flag (otho) (Entered: 09/29/2004)	PACER
	Sept. 29, 2004	SUMMONS(ES) issued and sent to atty for service by SPS as to Intelidata (otho) (Entered: 09/29/2004)	PACER
	Sept. 29, 2004	CASE REFERRED to Mag Judge Thomas R. Jones Jr. (otho)
	Sept. 29, 2004	Jury Trial Flag (otho)
	Sept. 29, 2004	SUMMONS(ES) issued and sent to atty for service by SPS as to Intelidata (otho)
2	Feb. 2, 2005	Financial Interest Disclosure Statement (Local Rule 7.1) by Intelidata (kjon) (Entered: 02/02/2005)	RECAP
3	Feb. 2, 2005	MOTION by Intelidata to Dismiss with prejudice, or by Intelidata for Summary Judgment (kjon) (Entered: 02/02/2005)	RECAP
4	Feb. 2, 2005	BRIEF by Intelidata in support of [3-1] motion by Intelidata to Dismiss with prejudice or [3-2] motion by Intelidata for Summary Judgment (kjon) (Entered: 02/02/2005)	RECAP
5	Feb. 2, 2005	NOTICE of Hearing: Motion Hearing Deadline before Judge Claude M. Hilton set for 10:00 3/4/05 for [3-1] motion by Intelidata to Dismiss with prejudice, set for 10:00 3/4/05 for [3-2] motion by Intelidata for Summary Judgment (kjon) (Entered: 02/02/2005)	RECAP
6	Feb. 3, 2005	SUMMONS Returned Executed as to Intelidata 1/13/05 Answer due on 2/2/05 for Intelidata (pmil) (Entered: 02/04/2005)	RECAP
7	Feb. 16, 2005	BRIEF by Equal Employment in opposition to [3-1] motion by Intelidata to Dismiss with prejudice or [3-2] motion by Intelidata for Summary Judgment (kjon) (Entered: 02/16/2005)	RECAP
8	Feb. 24, 2005	REPLY MEMORANDUM in support by Intelidata of [3-2] motion by Intelidata for Summary Judgment (clar) (Entered: 02/25/2005)	RECAP
9	March 3, 2005	ORDER setting Initial Pretrial Conference for 10:00 3/23/05 Discovery Deadline for 7/15/05 Final Pretrial Conference for 10:00 7/21/05 (see order for details) ( signed by Judge Claude M. Hilton ) Copies Mailed: Yes (kjon) (Entered: 03/04/2005)	RECAP
	March 3, 2005	Per CMH chambers motions set for 3/4/05 on papers (clar) (Entered: 03/03/2005)	PACER
	March 3, 2005	Deadline updated; reset Initial Pretrial Conference for 10:00 3/23/05 before Mag Judge Thomas R. Jones Jr. (kjon) (Entered: 03/04/2005)	PACER
	March 3, 2005	Per CMH chambers motions set for 3/4/05 on papers (clar)
	March 3, 2005	Deadline updated; reset Initial Pretrial Conference for 10:00 3/23/05 before Mag Judge Thomas R. Jones Jr. (kjon)
10	March 4, 2005	ORDER that [3-1] motion by Intelidata to Dismiss with prejudice and [3-2] motion by Intelidata for Summary Judgment are DENIED (see order for details) ( signed by Judge Claude M. Hilton ) Copies Mailed: Yes [EOD Date: 3/7/05] (kjon) (Entered: 03/07/2005)	RECAP
11	March 18, 2005	ANSWER AND DEFENSES to Complaint by Intelidata (Attorney Elizabeth A. Lalik),; jury demand (kjon) (Entered: 03/18/2005)	RECAP
12	March 18, 2005	Report of parties' planning meeting by Equal Employment, Intelidata (pmet) (Entered: 03/18/2005)	RECAP
13	March 23, 2005	Rule 16(B) Scheduling Order - Pursuant to the Rule 16(B) Conference it is hereby ordered that: a) The Rule 26(f) report filed by the parties is approved and shall control discovery to the extent of its application unless modified by the court. b) Copies of all non-dispositive motions and all paper relating to such motions shall be delivered directly to the chambers of the undersigned magistrate judge when the originals are filed with the clerk. c) Depositions of former employees who were FLSA exempt will be considered "employee" depositions for purposes of counting the number of "non-employee" depositions (see order for details) ( signed by Mag Judge Thomas R. Jones Jr. ) Mailed: Yes (kjon) (Entered: 03/24/2005)	RECAP
14	May 19, 2005	CONSENT DECREE, this decree constitutes a full discharge and satisfaction of any and all claims which have been alleged in the Complaint filed in this action by the EEOC based upon the charge filed by Nina Koeppen (see order for details) . Signed by Judge Claude M. Hilton on 5/19/05. (kjon, ) Copies mailed (Entered: 05/23/2005)	RECAP
	May 19, 2005	***Civil Case Terminated. (kjon, ) (Entered: 05/23/2005)	PACER
	May 19, 2005	***Civil Case Terminated. (kjon, )

show / hide docket entries

Case Details

State / Territory:

Virginia

Case Type(s):

Equal Employment

Special Collection(s):

EEOC Study — in sample

Key Dates

Filing Date: Sept. 29, 2004

Closing Date: May 19, 2005

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

Private Entity/Person

Intelidata Technologies, Corp.

Case Details

Causes of Action:

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

Other Dockets:

Eastern District of Virginia 1:04-cv-01149

Available Documents:

Trial Court Docket

Outcome

Prevailing Party: Plaintiff OR Mixed

Relief Granted:

Damages

Injunction / Injunctive-like Settlement

Source of Relief:

Settlement

Form of Settlement:

Court Approved Settlement or Consent Decree

Content of Injunction:

Discrimination Prohibition

Amount Defendant Pays: 59000

Issues

Discrimination Area:

Disparate Treatment

Harassment / Hostile Work Environment

Discrimination Basis:

Pregnancy discrimination

Sex discrimination

Affected Sex/Gender(s):

Female

EEOC-centric:

Direct Suit on Merits

Recommended Citation

Case Summary of EEOC v. InteliData Technologies, Corp., Civil Rights Litig. Clearinghouse, https://clearinghouse.net/case/6258/ (last updated 7/6/2007).