Case: EEOC v. MCDONALDS

1:05-cv-00204 | U.S. District Court for the District of New Mexico

Filed Date: Feb. 24, 2005

Closed Date: 2009

Clearinghouse coding complete

Case Summary

In February 2005, the Phoenix (along with the Washington, D.C. and Albuquerque) office of the EEOC brought this Title VII suit against McDonalds in the U.S. District Court for the District of New Mexico. The complaint alleged that the defendant discriminated against the claimants by subjecting them to a hostile work environment because of sex. Specifically, the defendant subjected the claimaints to unwelcome and inappropriate physical contact and lewd and inappropriate sexual remarks. The ca…

In February 2005, the Phoenix (along with the Washington, D.C. and Albuquerque) office of the EEOC brought this Title VII suit against McDonalds in the U.S. District Court for the District of New Mexico. The complaint alleged that the defendant discriminated against the claimants by subjecting them to a hostile work environment because of sex. Specifically, the defendant subjected the claimaints to unwelcome and inappropriate physical contact and lewd and inappropriate sexual remarks. The case settled by entry of a consent decree in March 2006.

The three year consent decree required the defendant to refrain from discrimination and retaliation, pay the claimants $90,000 in damages, provide the claimants with neutral reference, institute and implement policies that will promote a work environment free from sex discrimination and retaliation, review and revise its policies on sex discrimination/harassment and retaliation, distribute the policy, post notice, provide sex discrimination/harassment training for all employees, managers, supervisors, and officers, and give the EEOC reports every six months on any complaints of sex discrimination or retaliation and compliance with the decree. The docket sheet doesn't show any further enforcement took place; the case was presumably closed in 2009.

Summary Authors

Lionel Joiner (7/11/2007)

Documents in the Clearinghouse

Document

1:05-cv-00204

Docket [PACER]

EEOC v. Pand Enterprises, In

March 7, 2006

March 7, 2006

Docket
1

1:05-cv-00204

Complaint

EEOC v. Pand Enterprises, Inc., d/b/a McDonald's Restaurant

Feb. 24, 2005

Feb. 24, 2005

Complaint

EEOC Press Release

EEOC v. Pand Enterprises

No Court

Feb. 24, 2005

Feb. 24, 2005

Press Release
14

1:05-cv-00204

Order [of Consent Decree]

EEOC v. Pand Enterprises, Inc., d/b/a McDonald's Restaurant

March 7, 2006

March 7, 2006

Order/Opinion

EEOC Press Release

EEOC v. Pand Enterprises

No Court

March 10, 2006

March 10, 2006

Press Release

Resources

Docket

Last updated July 18, 2022, 3:08 a.m.

ECF Number Description Date Link Date / Link
1

COMPLAINT w/jury demand (referred to Magistrate Judge Richard L. Puglisi) (nc) Modified on 02/28/2005 (Entered: 02/25/2005)

Feb. 24, 2005

Feb. 24, 2005

LETTER re: consent to proceed before a US Magistrate Judge (nc) (Entered: 02/25/2005)

Feb. 24, 2005

Feb. 24, 2005

2

NOTICE by plaintiff of refusal to consent to proceed before a U.S. Magistrate Judge (sl) Modified on 03/03/2005 (Entered: 02/25/2005)

Feb. 25, 2005

Feb. 25, 2005

3

MINUTE ORDER: Case reassigned from Magistrate Judge Don J. Svet to District Judge William P. Johnson (cc: all counsel*) (sl) (Entered: 02/28/2005)

Feb. 28, 2005

Feb. 28, 2005

SUMMONS issued as to defendant Pand Enterprises, In (sl) (Entered: 04/13/2005)

April 13, 2005

April 13, 2005

4

ANSWER by defendant [1-1] (dmw) (Entered: 05/31/2005)

May 27, 2005

May 27, 2005

5

INITIAL SCHEDULING ORDER by Magistrate Judge Richard L. Puglisi Rule 16 scheduling conference set for 7/27/05 at 9:00 am; provisional discovery plan and IPTR due on 7/20/05 (cc: all counsel*) (sl) Modified on 06/06/2005 (Entered: 06/01/2005)

June 1, 2005

June 1, 2005

6

MINUTE ORDER: by the Clerk of Court Rule 16 scheduling conference reset for 8/2/05 at 9:00 am before Magistrate Judge Richard Puglisi in Albuquerque, NM (cc: all counsel*) (sl) (Entered: 07/12/2005)

July 12, 2005

July 12, 2005

7

CERTIFICATE of service by plaintiff of initial disclosures to counsel on 7/13/05* (sl) (Entered: 07/13/2005)

July 13, 2005

July 13, 2005

8

CERTIFICATE of service of initial disclosures by deft to counsel on 7/13/05 (jrm) (Entered: 07/14/2005)

July 13, 2005

July 13, 2005

9

ATTORNEYS' PROVISIONAL DISCOVERY PLAN (jm) (Entered: 07/26/2005)

July 25, 2005

July 25, 2005

10

CLERK'S MINUTES: before Magistrate Judge Richard L. Puglisi Rule 16 scheduling conference held (jrm) (Entered: 08/02/2005)

Aug. 2, 2005

Aug. 2, 2005

11

INITIAL PRE-TRIAL REPORT by District Judge William P. Johnson and Magistrate Judge Richard L. Puglisi ; Discovery set for 12/30/05 ;mtn filing ddl set for 2/16/06 ; proposed pretrial order due 5/4/06 ; pretrial conference set for 9:00 am on 6/19/06 ; jury trial set for 9:00 am on 7/5/06 ; Estimated # of Trial Days: 7-10; Chances of Settlement: Unknown (cc: all counsel) (sl) (Entered: 08/04/2005)

Aug. 4, 2005

Aug. 4, 2005

12

ORDER by Magistrate Judge Richard L. Puglisi setting settlement conference for 12/20/05 at 9:00 am (cc: all counsel*) (sl) (Entered: 08/04/2005)

Aug. 4, 2005

Aug. 4, 2005

14

ORDER by District Judge William P. Johnson of consent decree as described herein dismissing case (cc: all counsel) (sl) (Entered: 03/07/2006)

March 7, 2006

March 7, 2006

Case Details

State / Territory: New Mexico

Case Type(s):

Equal Employment

Special Collection(s):

EEOC Study — in sample

Multi-LexSum (in sample)

Key Dates

Filing Date: Feb. 24, 2005

Closing Date: 2009

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

Pand Enterprises, Inc. (Albuquerque), Private Entity/Person

Case Details

Causes of Action:

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

Availably Documents:

Trial Court Docket

Complaint (any)

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: 90000

Order Duration: 2006 - 2009

Content of Injunction:

Implement complaint/dispute resolution process

Neutral/Positive Reference

Discrimination Prohibition

Retaliation Prohibition

Other requirements regarding hiring, promotion, retention

Post/Distribute Notice of Rights / EE Law

Provide antidiscrimination training

Reporting

Issues

General:

Disparate Treatment

Retaliation

Discrimination-area:

Harassment / Hostile Work Environment

Other Conditions of Employment (including assignment, transfer, hours, working conditions, etc)

Discrimination-basis:

Sex discrimination

Affected Gender:

Male

EEOC-centric:

Direct Suit on Merits