Case: EEOC v. CENTRAL ENO CORPORATION

2:02-cv-07487 | U.S. District Court for the Central District of California

Filed Date: Sept. 1, 2002

Closed Date: Sept. 1, 2003

Clearinghouse coding complete

Case Summary

In September 2002, the EEOC district office in Los Angeles, California brought this suit against the Central ENO Corporation, doing business as ENO California V Generation Corporation, in the U.S. District Court for the Central District of California. The complaint is currently unavailable. The consent decree states that a former employee, a Hispanic male, alleged national origin discrimination in violation of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. Specifically, he claimed that the defen…

In September 2002, the EEOC district office in Los Angeles, California brought this suit against the Central ENO Corporation, doing business as ENO California V Generation Corporation, in the U.S. District Court for the Central District of California. The complaint is currently unavailable. The consent decree states that a former employee, a Hispanic male, alleged national origin discrimination in violation of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. Specifically, he claimed that the defendant denied him and other Hispanic employees equal working conditions and equal pay compared to similarly situated Korean employees. The former employee also claimed that the defendant terminated him when he complained about the discrimination. The case was quickly disposed of and a consent decree was entered in September 2003.

In the consent decree, the parties agreed that the defendant would pay the former employee $20,000 in compensatory damages only, refrain from discriminating on the basis of national origin, provide EEO training to its supervisory staff, keep a compensation log, post and distribute EEO notices, and submit semiannual reports to the EEOC. No fees or costs were awarded. The terms of the agreement ran for thirty months.

Summary Authors

Joel Pettit (6/16/2007)

Documents in the Clearinghouse

Document

2:02-cv-07487

Docket

EEOC v. Central ENO Corporation

Sept. 11, 2003

Sept. 11, 2003

Docket
16

2:02-cv-07487

Consent Decree

EEOC v. Central ENO Corporation

Sept. 11, 2003

Sept. 11, 2003

Settlement Agreement

Resources

Docket

Last updated Sept. 6, 2022, 3:19 a.m.

ECF Number Description Date Link Date / Link
1

COMPLAINT filed Summons(es) Issued referred to Discovery Charles F. Eick; Jury Demand (pc) (Entered: 09/27/2002)

Sept. 25, 2002

Sept. 25, 2002

2

CERTIFICATION OF INTERESTED PARTIES filed by plaintiff EEOC (pc) (Entered: 09/27/2002)

Sept. 25, 2002

Sept. 25, 2002

4

CLAIM for restitution and right to defend by claimant Librado Casillas, Susan Landeros (el) (Entered: 11/13/2002)

Nov. 5, 2002

Nov. 5, 2002

3

WAIVER OF SERVICE of SUMMONS by defendant Central ENO Corp sent by plf on 11/7/02 (el) (Entered: 11/13/2002)

Nov. 12, 2002

Nov. 12, 2002

5

CERTIFICATION OF INTERESTED PARTIES filed by defendant Central ENO Corp (el) (Entered: 12/02/2002)

Nov. 27, 2002

Nov. 27, 2002

6

ANSWER filed by defendant Central ENO Corporation to complaint [1-1] (el) (Entered: 12/02/2002)

Nov. 27, 2002

Nov. 27, 2002

7

MINUTES: On the Court's own motion, a mandatory status/scheduling conf is set for 11:00 3/3/03; Cnsl shall file a Rule 26(f) discovery plan within 14 days after the conf of cnsl. The Rule 26(f) discov plan shall contain the fol: (see doc) by Judge Consuelo B. Marshall CR: n/a (el) (Entered: 12/04/2002)

Dec. 2, 2002

Dec. 2, 2002

11

MINUTES: Scheduling conference held; non expert discovery be completed on or before 9/30/03; expert discovery shall be completed on or before 10/30/03; motions be set for oral argument on or before 12/8/03 10:00; pretrial conference 1/26/04 3:00; jury trial 2/17/04 10:00; settlement selection notice be lodged on or befre 3/13/03 by Judge Consuelo B. Marshall (lc) (Entered: 03/13/2003)

March 3, 2003

March 3, 2003

9

ORDER by Judge Consuelo B. Marshall re scheduling ; parties lodge mandatory settlement electin form on or before 3/13/03; expert discovery cutoff 10/30/03 discovery ddl on 9/30/03 ; motion hearing ddl set on 12/8/03; Final Pretrial Conference set for 3:00 1/26/04 ; trial set on 10:00 2/17/04 (lc) (Entered: 03/05/2003)

March 5, 2003

March 5, 2003

10

NOTICE AND REQUEST Of Settlement Procedure Selection #2 fld Parties request to apr bef an atty selected by the Settlement Officer Panel or apptd by the Judge for sttlmnt procdgs Order by Judge Consuelo B. Marshall granting settlement procedure selection request [10-1] (lc) (Entered: 03/13/2003)

March 12, 2003

March 12, 2003

12

ORDER OF THE CHIEF JUDGE # 03-043 approved by Judge Consuelo B. Marshall Pursuant to the recommended procedure adopted by the Court for the creation of the calendar of Judge S. James Otero , this case is transferred from the calendar of Judge Consuelo B. Marshall to the calendar of Judge S. J. Otero for all further proceedings. The new case number will now read as CV 02-7487 SJO (Ex) (cc: all counsel) (rn) (Entered: 03/21/2003)

March 19, 2003

March 19, 2003

13

MINUTES: Please take notice that this action has been randomly reassigned to the calendar of the Honorable S. James Otero, United States District Judge, pursuant to the Order of the Chief Judge. Pretrial Conference reset for 9:00 2/9/04; jury trial reset on 9:00 2/17/04 by Judge S. J. Otero CR: N/A (bp) (Entered: 04/02/2003)

April 1, 2003

April 1, 2003

14

PRETRIAL AND JURY TRIAL ORDER by Judge S. J. Otero. These are Judge S James Otero's mandatory instructions for Pretrial Conference and Jury Trial preparation and must be strictly adhered to (see document for further details) (el) Modified on 06/19/2003 (Entered: 06/19/2003)

June 19, 2003

June 19, 2003

15

STIPULATION REGARDING SELECTION of Attorney Settlement Officer. Parties stip that aty Jeffrey G Kichaven may sv as ASO for sttlmnt procdgs (el) (Entered: 08/06/2003)

Aug. 1, 2003

Aug. 1, 2003

16

CONSENT DECREE by Judge S. J. Otero against defendant Central ENO Corp officers etc are enjoined for the duration of the Consent Decree from discriminating against individual because of his or her national origin in terms of conditions of employement. Defendant agress to pay Alejandro Mendez the amount of $20,000.00 the entire amount of compenstory damages. Defendant and Commission shall bear its own court costs and attorneys' fees. terminating case (MD JS-6) (pj) (Entered: 09/12/2003)

Sept. 11, 2003

Sept. 11, 2003

Case Details

State / Territory: California

Case Type(s):

Equal Employment

Special Collection(s):

EEOC Study — in sample

Key Dates

Filing Date: Sept. 1, 2002

Closing Date: Sept. 1, 2003

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

The Central ENO Corporation, 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: 20000

Order Duration: 2003 - 2006

Content of Injunction:

Discrimination Prohibition

Monitoring

Post/Distribute Notice of Rights / EE Law

Reporting

Provide antidiscrimination training

Recordkeeping

Issues

General:

Disparate Treatment

Retaliation

Discrimination-area:

Discharge / Constructive Discharge / Layoff

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

Pay / Benefits

Discrimination-basis:

National origin discrimination

EEOC-centric:

Direct Suit on Merits

National Origin/Ethnicity:

Indian