Case: EEOC v. Incat Systems

2:01-cv-73461 | U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Michigan

Filed Date: Sept. 10, 2001

Closed Date: Oct. 31, 2002

Clearinghouse coding complete

Case Summary

The EEOC's Detroit office filed this suit on September 10, 2001 in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Michigan (Detroit). The EEOC alleged that defendant Incat Systems, Incorporated violated the Age Discrimination in Employment Act by discharging an employee because of her age, 65. The defendant filed a motion for summary judgment on August 22, 2002. The motion was granted, after a hearing, on October 31, 2002. The EEOC appealed the judgment but voluntarily stipulated to dismissal of the appeal on December 5, 2003.

Summary Authors

Jason Chester (3/8/2008)

People


Judge(s)

Cleland, Robert Hardy (Michigan)

Attorneys(s) for Plaintiff

Dawkins, Robert (Michigan)

Price, Dale (Michigan)

Rapport, Adele (Michigan)

Attorneys(s) for Defendant

Greene, James P (Michigan)

Silveri, Jeffery N (Michigan)

Judge(s)

Cleland, Robert Hardy (Michigan)

Attorneys(s) for Plaintiff

Dawkins, Robert (Michigan)

Price, Dale (Michigan)

Rapport, Adele (Michigan)

Attorneys(s) for Defendant

Greene, James P (Michigan)

Silveri, Jeffery N (Michigan)

Documents in the Clearinghouse

Document

Docket (PACER)

EEOC v. Incat Sys Inc

Dec. 5, 2003 Docket
22

Order Granting Defendant's Motion for Summary Judgment

EEOC v. Incat Systems, Inc.

Oct. 31, 2002 Order/Opinion
23

Judgment

EEOC v. Incat Systems, Inc.

Oct. 31, 2002 Order/Opinion
30

Order [USCA]

EEOC v. Incat Systems, Inc.

U. S. Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit

Dec. 5, 2003 Order/Opinion

Resources

Title Description External URL

Judicial Independence, Employment Discrimination Studies Funded

Ann Nicholson

This brief article describes the Clearinghouse's award of $12,000 to build its collection of employment discrimination class actions brought by private plaintiffs. Nov. 1, 2008 https://law.wustl.edu/...

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… April 1, 2022 https://cris.tau.ac.il/...

Docket

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

ECF Number Description Date Link
1

COMPLAINT with jury demand - Receipt # USA (dp) (Entered: 09/12/2001)

Sept. 10, 2001
2

ANSWER by defendant Incat Sys Inc to complaint [1-1] with proof of mailing (kg) (Entered: 11/14/2001)

Nov. 9, 2001
2

AFFIRMATIVE defenses by defendant Incat Sys Inc (kg) (Entered: 11/14/2001)

Nov. 9, 2001
3

NOTICE of Rule 16 and Rule 26(f) scheduling consultation (cm) (Entered: 12/07/2001)

Dec. 6, 2001
4

PRETRIAL scheduling order by Judge Robert H. Cleland - setting deadline for amended pleadings for 2/11/02 , setting deadline for witness list for 5/10/02 , setting deadline for discovery for 6/11/02 , setting deadline for filing dispositive motions for 7/11/02 , setting deadline for final pretrial order for 9/9/02 , setting settlement conference for 2:00 9/16/02 , setting deadline for motions in limine 9/9/02 (lg) (Entered: 01/15/2002)

Jan. 14, 2002
5

WITNESS list by plaintiff EEOC, with proof of service (kg) (Entered: 05/13/2002)

May 10, 2002
6

ORDER by Judge Robert H. Cleland, with stipulation, re-setting deadline for discovery for 7/11/02 and re-setting deadline for filing dispositive motions for 8/12/02 [EOD Date: 6/14/02] (jg) (Entered: 06/14/2002)

June 13, 2002
8

ORDER by Judge Robert H. Cleland granting in part motion to extend discovery cutoff and dispositive motion filing deadlines by Incat Sys Inc, EEOC [7-1], setting deadline for discovery for 8/19/02 , setting deadline for filing dispositive motions for 8/22/02 [EOD Date 7/19/02] (nh) (Entered: 07/19/2002)

July 15, 2002
9

MOTION by plaintiff EEOC to compel discovery ; with brief, exhibits A-C, notice of hearing and proof of service (dp) (Entered: 08/19/2002)

Aug. 19, 2002
10

MOTION by defendant for summary judgment with brief (cm) (Entered: 08/30/2002)

Aug. 22, 2002
11

FACT APPENDIX by defendant Incat Sys Inc in support of motion for summary judgment by Incat Sys Inc [10-1] (cm) (Entered: 08/30/2002)

Aug. 22, 2002
12

PROOF of service by defendant of [10-1], [11-1] (cm) (Entered: 08/30/2002)

Aug. 22, 2002
13

NOTICE of setting hearing on motion for summary judgment by Incat Sys Inc [10-1] for 2:00 10/30/02 (cm) (Entered: 09/05/2002)

Sept. 3, 2002
14

NOTICE of continued deadline for final pretrial order , and civil trial until after ruling on dispositive motions (cm) (Entered: 09/05/2002)

Sept. 3, 2002
15

LETTER by EEOC, setting deadline for response to motion for summary judgment by Incat Sys Inc [10-1] for 10/7/02 , setting deadline for reply to response to motion for summary judgment by Incat Sys Inc [10-1] for 10/7/02 (lg) (Entered: 09/26/2002)

Sept. 19, 2002
16

BRIEF in support by EEOC to motion for summary judgment by Incat Sys Inc [10-1] with brief and proof of mailing (lg) (Entered: 10/03/2002)

Oct. 2, 2002
17

APPENDIX by EEOC to motion response by EEOC [16-1] (lg) (Entered: 10/03/2002)

Oct. 2, 2002
18

RESPONSE by EEOC to motion for summary judgment by Incat Sys Inc [10-1] (lg) (Entered: 10/03/2002)

Oct. 2, 2002
19

EXPARTE motion by defendant Incat Sys Inc for leave to file reply brief in excess of five pages (kg) (Entered: 10/17/2002)

Oct. 8, 2002
20

ORDER by Judge Robert H. Cleland granting motion for leave to file reply brief in excess of five pages by Incat Sys Inc [19-1] [EOD Date 10/25/02] (kg) (Entered: 10/25/2002)

Oct. 22, 2002
21

REPLY by defendant Incat Sys Inc to response to motion for summary judgment [10-1] with fact appexdix, exhibits N-S and proof of service (kg) (Entered: 10/25/2002)

Oct. 22, 2002

MOTION hearing held on motion for summary judgment by Incat Sys Inc [10-1] - disposition: TAKEN UNDER ADVISEMENT - Judge Robert H. Cleland - Court Reporter: Mary Wisneski (lt) (Entered: 10/31/2002)

Oct. 30, 2002
22

ORDER by Judge Robert H. Cleland granting motion for summary judgment by Incat Sys Inc [10-1] with proof of service [EOD Date 11/4/02] (kg) (Entered: 11/04/2002)

Oct. 31, 2002
23

JUDGMENT entered by Judge Robert H. Cleland for defendant [EOD Date: 11/4/02] (kg) (Entered: 11/04/2002)

Oct. 31, 2002
24

ORDER by Judge Robert H. Cleland with stipulation dismissing motion to compel discovery by EEOC [9-1] [EOD Date: 11/15/02] (nh) (Entered: 11/15/2002)

Nov. 13, 2002
25

APPEAL by plaintiff EEOC of orders [23-1] and [22-1] to USCA - FEE: not paid - Receipt #: ausa (do) (Entered: 12/30/2002)

Dec. 30, 2002
26

PROOF of service of appeal notice [25-1] to USCA, counsel and court reporter of record (do) (Entered: 12/30/2002)

Dec. 30, 2002
27

CERTIFIED copy of appeal notice by EEOC [25-1] and docket transmitted to USCA (do) (Entered: 12/30/2002)

Dec. 30, 2002
28

ACKNOWLEDGMENT from USCA of receipt of appeal notice by EEOC [25-1] - appeal case #03-1062 (kg) (Entered: 01/22/2003)

Jan. 21, 2003
29

TRANSCRIPT order form by plaintiff EEOC regarding appeal notice by EEOC [25-1] requesting transcript(s) of: 10/30/02 -appeal case # 03-1062 (nh) Modified on 01/28/2003 (Entered: 01/27/2003)

Jan. 23, 2003
30

NON-CERTIFIED copy of order from USCA dismissing appeal - appeal case # 03-1062 (jg) (Entered: 12/08/2003)

Dec. 5, 2003

State / Territory: Michigan

Case Type(s):

Equal Employment

Special Collection(s):

EEOC Study — in sample

Key Dates

Filing Date: Sept. 10, 2001

Closing Date: Oct. 31, 2002

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

Incat Systems, Incorporated, Private Entity/Person

Case Details

Causes of Action:

Age Discrimination in Employment Act (ADEA), 29 U.S.C. §§ 621 et seq.

Availably Documents:

Trial Court Docket

Outcome

Prevailing Party: Defendant

Nature of Relief:

None

Source of Relief:

None

Issues

General:

Disparate Treatment

Discrimination-area:

Discharge / Constructive Discharge / Layoff

Discrimination-basis:

Age discrimination

EEOC-centric:

Direct Suit on Merits