Case 3:04-cv-02031-RLA Document 1-1 Filed 09/30/2004 Page 1 of 6

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF PUERTO RICO

UNITED STATES EQUAL EMPLOYMENT )

OPPORTUNITY COMMISSION,

)

)

Plaintiff,

)

)

v.

)

)

LUPIS ENTERPRISES INC. d/b/a

)

LUPIS MEXICAN GRILL & SPORTS CANTINA )

)

Defendant.

)

)

CIVIL ACTION NO.
COMPLAINT JURY TRIAL DEMANDED INJUNCTIVE RELIEF SOUGHT

NATURE OF THE ACTION This is an action under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and Title I of the Civil Rights Act of 1991 to correct unlawful employment practices on the basis of sex and retaliation, and to provide appropriate relief to Lissette Betancourt, Yadira Rivera Martinez, Tania Cruz Romero and Jannessa Hammerle, who were adversely affected by such practices. As stated with greater particularity in paragraph 7, the Commission alleges that Ms. Betancourt, Ms. Rivera, Ms. Cruz and Ms. Hammerle were subjected to sexual harassment by a management official of the Defendant corporation. The Commission further alleges that Defendant subjected Ms. Betancourt to adverse terms and conditions of her employment for rejecting the management official’s sexual advances and/or in retaliation for complaining of the sexual harassment. In addition, the Commission alleges that Defendant unlawfully retaliated against Ms. Betancourt for complaining of the unlawful sexual harassment by discharging her from her employment

.
1

Case 3:04-cv-02031-RLA Document 1-1 Filed 09/30/2004 Page 2 of 6
JURISDICTION AND VENUE 1. Jurisdiction of this Court is invoked pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §§ 451, 1331, 1337, 1343 and 1345. This action is authorized and instituted pursuant to Section 706(f)(1) and (3) of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, as amended, 42 U.S.C. § 2000e-5(f)(1) and (3) ("Title VII"), and Section 102 of the Civil Rights Act of 1991, 42 U.S.C. § 1981A. 2. The employment practices alleged to be unlawful were committed within the jurisdiction of the United States District Court for the District of Puerto Rico.
PARTIES 3. Plaintiff, the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (the "Commission"), is the agency of the United States of America charged with the administration, interpretation and enforcement of Title VII, and is expressly authorized to bring this action by Section 706(f)(1) and (3) of Title VII, 42 U.S.C. § 2000e-5(f)(1) and (3). 4. At all relevant times, Defendant, a Puerto Rico corporation, has continuously been doing business in Isla Verde and San Juan, and has continuously had at least 15 employees. 5. At all relevant times, Defendant has continuously been an employer engaged in an industry affecting commerce within the meaning of Sections 701(b), (g) and (h) of Title VII, 42 U.S.C. §§2000e(b), (g) and (h).
STATEMENT OF CLAIMS 6. More than thirty days prior to the institution of this lawsuit Ms. Betancourt, Ms. Rivera, Ms. Cruz and Ms. Hammerle filed charges with the Commission alleging violations of Title VII by the Defendant. All conditions precedent to the institution of this lawsuit have been fulfilled. 7. Since at least January of 2002, Defendant Employer engaged in unlawful employment
2

Case 3:04-cv-02031-RLA Document 1-1 Filed 09/30/2004 Page 3 of 6
practices in violation of Section 703(a) and Section 704(a) of Title VII, 42 U.S.C. §2000e-2(a) and §2000e-3(a).
a. Lissette Betancourt was subjected to sexual harassment by Defendant’s Assistant Manager in the form of unwelcome physical and verbal conduct of a sexual nature which was sufficiently severe and pervasive to constitute an intimidating, hostile and offensive work environment. Defendant failed to take prompt corrective action when it knew or should have known of the sexual harassment.
b. Defendant subjected Lissette Betancourt to adverse terms and conditions of her employment, including unfavorable work schedules and job assignments, for rejecting the sexual advances of Defendant’s Assistant Manager and/or in retaliation for complaining of the sexual harassment.
b. Defendant unlawfully retaliated against Lisette Betancourt for complaining of the unlawful sexual harassment by discharging her from her position.
c. Yadira Rivera Martinez was subjected to sexual harassment by Defendant’s Assistant Manager in the form of unwelcome physical and verbal conduct of a sexual nature which was sufficiently severe and pervasive to constitute an intimidating, hostile and offensive work environment. Defendant failed to take prompt corrective action when it knew or should have known of the sexual harassment.
d. Tania Cruz Romero was subjected to sexual harassment by Defendant’s Assistant Manager in the form of unwelcome physical and verbal conduct of
3

Case 3:04-cv-02031-RLA Document 1-1 Filed 09/30/2004 Page 4 of 6
a sexual nature which was sufficiently severe and pervasive to constitute an intimidating, hostile and offensive work environment. Defendant failed to take prompt corrective action when it knew or should have known of the sexual harassment. e. Jannessa Hammerle was subjected to sexual harassment by Defendant’s Assistant Manager in the form of unwelcome physical and verbal conduct of a sexual nature which was sufficiently severe and pervasive to constitute an intimidating, hostile and offensive work environment. Defendant failed to take prompt corrective action when it knew or should have known of the sexual harassment. 8. The effect of the conduct complained of in paragraph 7 above has been to deprive Ms. Betancourt, Ms. Rivera, Ms. Cruz and Ms. Hammerle of equal employment opportunities and otherwise adversely affect their status as employees because of their sex. 9. The effect of the conduct complained of in paragraph 7 above has been to deprive Ms. Betancourt of equal employment opportunities and otherwise adversely affect her status as an employee in retaliation for opposition to unlawful employment practices. 10. The unlawful employment practices complained of in paragraph 7 above were intentional. 11. The unlawful employment practices complained of in paragraph 7 above were done with malice or with reckless indifference to the federally protected rights of Ms. Betancourt, Ms. Rivera, Ms. Cruz and Ms. Hammerle.
4

Case 3:04-cv-02031-RLA Document 1-1 Filed 09/30/2004 Page 5 of 6
PRAYER FOR RELIEF Wherefore, the Commission respectfully requests that this Court: A. Grant a permanent injunction enjoining Defendant, its officers, successors, assigns, and all persons in active concert or participation with Defendant, from engaging in sexual harassment and any other employment practice which discriminates on the basis of sex and/or opposition to an unlawful employment practice. B. Order Defendant, to institute and carry out policies, practices, and programs which provide equal employment opportunities for females, and which eradicate the effects of its past unlawful employment practices. C. Order Defendant to make whole Ms. Betancourt by providing appropriate back pay with prejudgment interest, in amounts to be determined at trial, and other affirmative relief necessary to eradicate the effects of its unlawful employment practices. D. Order Defendant to make whole Ms. Betancourt, Ms. Rivera, Ms. Cruz and Ms. Hammerle by providing compensation for past and future pecuniary losses resulting from the unlawful employment practices described in paragraph 7 above, including out of pocket losses in amounts to be determined at trial. E. Order Defendant to make whole Ms. Betancourt, Ms. Rivera, Ms. Cruz and Ms. Hammerle by providing compensation for past and future nonpecuniary losses resulting from the unlawful practices complained of in paragraph 7 above, including emotional pain, suffering, inconvenience, humiliation, and loss of enjoyment of life, in amounts to be determined at trial. F. Order Defendant to pay Ms. Betancourt, Ms. Rivera, Ms. Cruz and Ms. Hammerle punitive damages for its malicious and reckless conduct described in paragraph 7 above, in amounts
5

Case 3:04-cv-02031-RLA Document 1-1 Filed 09/30/2004 Page 6 of 6
to be determined at trial. G. Grant such further relief as the Court deems necessary and proper in the public
interest. H. Award the Commission its costs in this action. JURY TRIAL DEMAND The Commission requests a jury trial on all questions of fact raised by its complaint. Respectfully Submitted, ERIC S. DRIEBAND General Counsel JAMES L. LEE Deputy General Counsel GWENDOLYN YOUNG REAMS Associate General Counsel DELNER FRANKLIN-THOMAS Regional Attorney
/s/ Michael Farrell MICHAEL J. FARRELL Supervisory Trial Attorney Florida Bar No. 0053228 EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY COMMISSION 2 S. Biscayne Blvd., #2700 Miami, Florida 33131 Tel. (305) 530-6004 Fax (305) 536-4494
6

 </s> Case 3:04-cv-02031-RLA Document 25 Filed 08/01/2006 Page 1 of 1

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF PUERTO RICO

UNITED STATES EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY COMMISSION
V.
LUPIS ENTERPRISES, INC. d/b/a LUPIS MEXICAN GRILL & SPORTS CANTINA

CASE NUMBER: CIVIL 04-2031 (RLA) O R D E R

MOTION

RULING

Date Filed: 5/31/06 [X] Plaintiff

Docket # 23

Title: Plaintiff Equal Employment Opportunity Commission's Motion to Compel Financial Worth Discovery and Incorporated Memorandum of Law

Having carefully considered the arguments of the parties (see also, docket No. 24), the Court FINDS that pre-trial discovery of defendant's financial condition will further the interest of judicial economy and avoid the potential for delay and confusion at trial. We further find that delaying the production of the information sought by Interrogatory 1-18 and Request for Production 16 will impede the timely progress of this case as it moves toward a final and just resolution. See, e.g., St. Joseph Hosp. v. INA Underwriters, Ins. Co., 117 F.R.D. 24 (D. Me. 1987).

Accordingly, defendant shall produce answers to EEOC's Interrogatory 1-18 and the pertinent documents requested in EEOC's Request No. 16 on or before August 21, 2006. Failure to comply shall result in the imposition of sanctions.

August 1, 2006 Date

S/Raymond L. Acosta RAYMOND L. ACOSTA U.S. District Judge

 </s> Case 3:04-cv-02031-RLA Document 38-1 Filed 12/21/2006 Page 1 of 8

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF PUERTO RICO

UNITEDSTATESEQUALEMWLOYMENT

)

OPPORTUNITY COMMISSION,

)

)

Plaintiff,

)

)

v.

)

)

LUPIS ENTERPRISES INC. d/b/a

)

LUPIS MEXICAN GRILL & SPORTS CANTINA )

)

_____________D__ef_en_d_an_t.___________))

CNIL ACTION NO. 3 :04-cv-02031-RLA
~('~~
/Y"'~~'~"/t/-'dt?~

CONSENT DECREE

1. This Consent Decree (the "Decree") is made and entered into by and between

Plaintiff, the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (hereinafter referred to as the "Commission" or "EEOC"), and Defendant, Lupis Enterprises Inc. d/b/a Lupis Mexican Grill & Sports Cantina hereinafter referred to as the "Company or "Defendant"). The Commission and

Defendant are collectively referred to herein as "the Parties."

2.

On September 30, 2004, EEOC initiated this action by filing its Complaint in the

United States District Court for the District ofPuerto Rico, Civil Action No. 3:04-CV-02031-RLA,

based upon charges filed by Lissette Betancourt (EEOC Charges No.'s 16H-A4000-21; 16H-A400 1-

36), Yadira Rivera Martinez (EEOC Charge No. 16H-A4000-22), Tania Cruz Romero (EEOC

ChargeNo.16H-A4000-14),andJannessaHammerle(EEOCChargeNo.16H-A4000-20). EEOC's

Complaint alleges that Defendant violated Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, as amended,

including but not limited to, amendments authorized by the Civil Rights Act of 1991, 42 U.S.C.

1

..
Case 3:04-cv-02031-RLA Document 38-1 Filed 12/21/2006 Page 2 of 8

Section 2000e et seq. (..Title VIT') by subjecting Ms. Betancourt, Ms. Rivera, Ms. Cruz and Ms.

Hammerle to sexual harassment by a management official ofthe Defendant corporation which was

sufficiently severe and pervasive to constitute a hostile, intimidating work environment. The

Complaint further alleges that Defendant subjected Ms. Betancourt to adverse terms and conditions

of her employment forrejecting the management official's sexual advances and retaliated against

her for complaining of the sexual harassment by discharging her from her employment.

3.

In the interests ofresolving this matter, to avoid the costs oflitigation, and as a result

ofhaving engaged in comprehensive settlement negotiations, the Parties have agreed that this action

should be finally resolved by entry ofthis Decree. This Decree is final and binding upon the Parties,

their successors and assigns.

4.

The Parties agree that this Decree resolves all claims alleged against the Defendant

in EEOC Charge Numbers 16H-A4000-21; 16H-A4001-36; 16H-A4000-22; 16H-A4000-14 and

16H.A4000-20, and the Complaint filed in this action, and constitutes a complete resolution of all

claims under Title Vll that were made by the Commission in this action.

5.

NOW, THEREFORE, the Court having carefully examined the terms and provisions

ofthis Decree, and based on the pleadings filed by the parties, it is ORDERED, ADJUDGED AND

DECREED THAT:

JURISDICTION

6.

This Court has jurisdiction ofthe subject matter ofthis action and over the Parties for

the purposes of entering and enforcing this Decree. This Court also has jurisdiction over Eduardo

Figueroa, individually, with respect to his obligations as guarantor under paragraph 18 hereof.

7.

No party, including Eduardo Figueroa individually, shall contest jurisdiction ofthis

2

Case 3:04-cv-02031-R--L--A.. - .....D-·o-cu--m---e...n..t..3-8----1----···F···ile. d 12/21/2006 Page 3 of 8

federal court to enforce this Decree and its terms or the right of the EEOC to seek enforcement in the event Defendant breaches any of the terms of this Decree.

GENERAL PROVISIONS

8.

Defendant, its officers, and employees, are hereby enjoined from engaging in conduct

which violates Title Vll of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, as amended, by adversely affecting the

terms and conditions of any individual's employment because of their gender.

9.

Defendant, its officers, and employees, are hereby enjoined froni discriminating

against any employee who opposes any ofDefendant's practices which the employee believes to be

unlawful employment discrimination, who files a charge ofdiscrimination with the EEOC alleging

violation(s) of such statute; who cooperates with the EEOC in the investigation and/or prosecution

·of any charge of discrimination; or who cooperated in the investigation or prosecution of this case.

DISCRIMINATION POLICY AND TRAINING

10. Defendant agrees to establish and maintain for the duration ofthis Decree a written

policy against sexual harassment which is attached as Exhibit A. Defendant agrees that all of its

employees and managers will be provided a complete copy of its policy against sexual harassment

within thirty (30) days of the entry of this Decree. Defendant also agrees that all new employees shall be given a copy ofits policy against sexual harassment within their first week of employment

with the Defendant. 11 In order to further ensure the effective implementation of Defendant's anti-
discrimination policy, Defendant will conduct a two (2) hour annual training for all of its managers and supervisory personnel with specific emphasis on recognizing harassment, on acts that could constitute retaliation, and on the proper procedure to be followed if they become aware of

3

Case 3:04-cv-02031-RLA

Document 38-1

Filed 12/21/2006

Page-

·4··-o· f..8..

... '

.

harassment in the workplace or ifthey receive complaints of discrimination. Defendant agrees to provide the EEOC, at least two weeks notice before it conducts its training session(s), with the date(s) and location(s) of the training, the identification ofthe training materials to be used at the training session, and a general description ofthe category of employees who will be in attendance at the training. The training will be conducted by an individual selected by Defendant's counsel and approved by EEOC. Additionally, Defendant agrees that the EEOC shall, at the EEOC's discretion, be in attendance at each training session(s).
12 Defendant agrees that the training described in paragraph 11 shall be conducted within thirty (30) days ofthe entry ofthis Decree. And, should thereafter take place annually in the same format, by November 30, for the duration of this Decree. Defendant further agrees that the discrimination policy and training materials utilized for the training described in paragraph 11 shall be presented to and explained to all new managers and supervisors, who did not attend the annual training, within thirty (30) days of being placed in a management or supervisory position.
POSTING 13. Defendant will post a laminated 11 x 14 copy of the Notice, attached as Exhibit B, no later than November 30, 2006. Said notice shall be posted at both ofDefendant's restaurants for the duration of this Decree in a conspicuous location accessible to all employees such as an employee bulletin board and/or break/lunch room.
MONITORING 14. Defendant will retain all employment and/or investigative records relating in any way to any complaint or allegation ofharassment at the Defendant's restaurants for the duration ofthis Decree and as required under federal law.
4

Case 3:04-cv-02031-RLA Document 38-1 Filed 12/21/2006 Page 5 of 8
15. Defendant will certify to the EEOC semi-annually throughout the duration of this Decree that it is in compliance with all aspects ofthis Decree. The first such certification will be due no later than thirty(30) days from the first training provided pursuant to paragraph 11. With each certification Defendant will further provide the EEOC with the name, address, and phone number of any person who alleges they have been harassed while working for Defendant during the preceding six month period. Defendant will also state the actions taken in response to each such allegation and provide any and all documentation associated with such complaint. The certifications required to be submitted to the EEOC pursuant to this Consent Decree shall be mailed with the notation LUPIS MEXICAN GRilL & SPORTS CANTINA to: United States Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, Attention: Office oftheRegional Attorney, 1Biscayne Tower, Suite 2700, 2 South Biscayne Boulevard, Miami, Fl 33131.
MONETARY RELIEF 16. Defendant agrees to pay a total amount of $55,000.00 (Fifty-five thousand dollars) to resolve this litigation. The payments referenced herein shall issue and be distributed as set forth below in Exhibit C attached hereto. 17. If Defendant fails to tender the above-mentioned payment as set forth in paragraph 16 above and Exhibit C, then Defendant's shall pay interest on the defaulted payment at the rate calculated pursuant to 26 U.S.C. Section 6621(b) until the same is paid, and bear any additional costs incurred by the EEOC caused by the non-compliance or delay ofthe Defendant. If for any reason whatsoever Defendant fails to make all payments in full on their respective due dates, then the obligation ofDefendant to pay all amounts then and thereafter due (i.e., payments scheduled to become due at a later date) and all interest and other fees and costs shall be automatically
5

Case 3:04-cv-02031-RLA Document 38-1 Filed 12/21/2006 ------ --·-r -----·---·---- -·· -----· ------------ ·----- ------------------------------- ---· -. Page 6 of 8

accelerated, without further act or deed by any person, and without further notice to or order ofthis Court, so that the entire amount then remaining due and payable shall be immediately due and

payable. 18. Eduardo Figueroa ("Figueroa") hereby agrees to personally guaranty all payments
(including interest, fees and costs) due from Defendant under this Consent Decree. lfDefendant fails to make payment of any amount due hereunder at the scheduled date for payment, Figueroa shall, without further act or deed by any person, and without further notice to or order ofthis Court, make such payment (including any amounts accelerated pursuant to paragraph 17, above) within 10 days

of the date the payment by Defendant was due.
ENFORCEMENT OF DECREE
19. The Commission shall have independent authority to seek the judicial enforcement

of any aspect, term or provision of this Decree. 20. The terms of this Consent Decree shall be binding upon the present and future
directors, officers, managers, agents, successors and assigns of Defendant. Defendant will provide a copy of this Consent Decree to any organization or person which proposes to merge with Defendant or acquire a majority or all of the stock in, or substantially all the assets of, Defendant, prior to the effectiveness of any such merger or acquisition. This paragraph shall not be deemed to limit any remedies available in the event ofany finding by the Court of contempt for a violation of

this Decree.

COSTS

21. Each Party shall bear its own costs associated with this litigation.

6

Cas,-e--3--:0--4---c-·v---0--2-0- 3-1----R--L-A--- --D--o·c-u·-m--e-n--t-38---1--- F--i-l-e··d 12/·2·-1--/· 2--0- 0·-6··--·---P---a--g-e -7----o-f 8

DURATION OF CONSENT DECREE 22. The duration of this Decree shall be two (2) years from the date of entry of the

Decree. 23.

The Court will take whatever measures necessary to effectuate the terms of this

Decree.

~

SO ORDERED, ADJUDGED AND DECREED, thiM._ day of neeember, 2006.

RAYMOND L. ACOSTA UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

AGREED TO:
FOR THE PLAINTIFF, UNITED STATES EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY CO:M:M:ISSION

by: s/ Gregory Gochanour

Date: November 22, 2006

Gregory Gochanour Acting Regional Attorney U.S. EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY COMMISSION

Miami District Office One Biscayne Tower, Suite 2700

2 South Biscayne Boulevard

Miami, Florida 33131

Telephone: (305) 530-6001

Facsimile: (305) 536-4494

7

Case 3:04-cv-02031-RLA Document 38-1 Filed 12/21/2006 Page 8 of 8

AOJd!lU) TO:
~Ttla~:
WPlS ENT.B1tP&JIB&JNC::, cUbt'a LUJriS MJI:Xk"AM GRD..I. & $POll.TS CAN'l'INA.

"v. 1£ lgriw•J· Msnde• M. .l

~ :. M~~D~SG• , .......

U8pe;..pJl202104

Aaamey:a. D. .IIUA,

J-. NJ!Nt)DZ.A..LAW omcss

P.O,IIv&QB2

S.

~t.L 00901-GU

Tel. (?1"1) 7::a-sn:z.; "122-.U:H

PIDC. ('71'7) nJ.,'705"7

-

•

 </s> CM/ECF LIVE - U.S. District Court for the District of Puerto Rico - Docket Report

Page 1 of 6

CLOSED, JUDGEDUP
United States District Court District of Puerto Rico (San Juan) CIVIL DOCKET FOR CASE #: 3:04-cv-02031-RLA

United States Equal Employment Opportunity Commission v. Lupis Enterprises Inc. Assigned to: Judge Raymond L. Acosta Cause: 28:1345 USA Plaintiff

Date Filed: 09/30/2004 Jury Demand: Plaintiff Nature of Suit: 442 Civil Rights: Jobs Jurisdiction: U.S. Government Plaintiff

Plaintiff
United States Equal Employment Opportunity Commission

represented by Carla J. Von Greiff U. S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission - Tampa, FL 501 E Polk St. Suite 1000 Tampa, FL 33602 813-202-7903 Fax: 813-228-2045 Email: carla.vongreiff@eeoc.gov LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

Michael Farrell Equal Employment Opportunity Commission 2 S. Biscayne Blvd. Suite 2700 Miami, FL 33131 (305)530-6004 Fax: (305)536-4494 TERMINATED: 08/19/2005 LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

Maritza I. Gomez-Fernandez EEOC Miami District Office One Biscayne Tower, Suite 2700 Two South Biscayne Blvd. Miami, FL 33131-1805 305-808-1790 Fax: 305-808-1835 Email: maritza.gomez@eeoc.gov TERMINATED: 03/11/2005 ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

V.

https://ecf.prd.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/DktRpt.pl?763982730250674-L_923_0-1

5/21/2007

CM/ECF LIVE - U.S. District Court for the District of Puerto Rico - Docket Report

Page 2 of 6

Defendant
Lupis Enterprises Inc. doing business as Lupis Mexican Grill & Sports Cantina

represented by Enrique J. Mendoza-Mendez Mendoza Law Office PO Box 9282 San Juan, PR 00908-0282 787-722-5522 Fax: 787-723-7057 Email: mendozalo@yahoo.com LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

Date Filed 09/30/2004
10/01/2004 01/20/2005
01/21/2005 02/23/2005 02/24/2005
03/04/2005 03/11/2005

#

Docket Text

1 COMPLAINT fee waived / federal government agency against Lupis Enterprises Inc. (Filing fee $ 150.), filed by United States Equal Employment Opportunity Commission. (Attachments: # 1 Civil Cover Sheet # 2 USDC Category Sheet# 3 USDC Current Address Notice) (Gomez-Fernandez, Maritza) (Entered: 10/19/2004)

2 Summons Issued as to Lupis Enterprises Inc. Service due by 1/29/2005. (il, DQA) Modified on 10/22/2004 (il, DQA). s/c M. Farrell (Entered: 10/22/2004)

3 MOTION for Extension of Time until February 23, 2005 to File Answer to Complaint re: 1 Complaint, filed by United States Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, filed byEnrique J. Mendoza-Mendez on behalf of Lupis Enterprises Inc. Suggestions in opposition/response due by 2/2/2005 (Related document(s)1) (Mendoza-Mendez, Enrique) (Entered: 01/20/2005)

4 ENDORSED ORDER granting 3 Motion for Extension of Time to Answer. Answer to Complaint due by 2/23/2005. Signed by Judge Raymond L. Acosta on 1/21/05. (ans, ) Modified on 1/24/2005 s/c to Farrell (su, ). (Entered: 01/21/2005)

5 ANSWER to Complaint filed by Enrique J. Mendoza-Mendez on behalf of Defendant Lupis Enterprises Inc..(Mendoza-Mendez, Enrique) (Entered: 02/23/2005)

6 ORDER - JOINT ISC Memorandum Filing due by 3/21/2005. Initial Scheduling Conference set for 3/29/2005 03:30 PM in RLA's Chambers before Judge Raymond L. Acosta, etc as stated herein. Signed by Judge Raymond L. Acosta on 2/24/05. (su, ) Modified on 2/24/2005 s/c Farrell (su, ). (Entered: 02/24/2005)

7 NOTICE of Substitution of Counsel by United States Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (Von Greiff, Carla) (Entered: 03/04/2005)

8 ENDORSED ORDER NOTED 7 Notice of Substitution of Counsel, filed by United States Equal Employment Opportunity Commission. Attorney Carla J. Von Greiff for United States Equal Employment Opportunity

https://ecf.prd.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/DktRpt.pl?763982730250674-L_923_0-1

5/21/2007

CM/ECF LIVE - U.S. District Court for the District of Puerto Rico - Docket Report

Page 3 of 6

03/15/2005 03/30/2005
04/18/2005 04/19/2005 08/16/2005 08/19/2005 11/30/2005 12/12/2005
02/21/2006 02/22/2006

Commission added. Attorney Maritza I. Gomez-Fernandez terminated. Signed by Judge Raymond L. Acosta on 3/11/05. (ans, ) (Entered: 03/11/2005)
9 JOINT INITIAL SCHEDULING CONFERENCE MEMORANDUM by All Parties. (Von Greiff, Carla) Modified filer & text on 3/30/2005 (su, ). (Entered: 03/15/2005)
10 MINUTES - ISC held on 3/29/05. APPROVING 9 Joint ISC Memorandum. Joint Status Report due by 12/8/2005. Status/Settlement Conference SET for 12/15/2005 02:00 PM in RLA's Chambers before Judge Raymond L. Acosta, etc as stated herein. Signed by Judge Raymond L. Acosta on 3/30/05. (su, ) (Entered: 03/30/2005)
11 NOTICE of Unavailability of Counsel from May 27, 2005 through June 13, 2005 by United States Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (Von Greiff, Carla) (Entered: 04/18/2005)
12 ENDORSED ORDER NOTED 11 Notice of Unavailability of Counsel, filed by United States Equal Employment Opportunity Commission. Signed by Judge Raymond L. Acosta on 4/19/05. (ans, ) (Entered: 04/19/2005)
13 NOTICE of Withdrawal of Counsel of Record Michael Farrell by United States Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (Von Greiff, Carla) Modified to add name of counselon 6/13/2006 (su, ). (Entered: 08/16/2005)
14 ENDORSED ORDER NOTED 13 Notice of Withdrawal as Counsel of Record, filed by United States Equal Employment Opportunity Commission. Attorney Michael Farrell terminated. Signed by Judge Raymond L. Acosta on 8/19/05. (ans, ) (Entered: 08/19/2005)
15 STATUS REPORT by Lupis Enterprises Inc.. (Mendoza-Mendez, Enrique) (Entered: 11/30/2005)
16 ORDER Rescheduling Status/Settlement Conference. NOTED 15 Joint
Status Report. STATUS/SETTLEMENT Conference is reset for 2/27/2006 at 2:30 PM in RLA's Chambers before Judge Raymond L. Acosta.Joint Status Report is due by 2/21/2006,
as stated herein. Signed by Judge Raymond L. Acosta on 12/12/05. (ans) (Entered: 12/12/2005)
17 STATUS REPORT Joint by United States Equal Employment Opportunity Commission. (Von Greiff, Carla) (Entered: 02/21/2006)
18 Second ORDER Rescheduling Status/Settlement Conference, NOTED 17
Status Report. Status/Settlement Conference is reset for 4/20/2006 at 2:00 PM in RLA's Chambers before Judge Raymond L. Acosta.JOINT Status Report is due by 4/12/2006, etc., as stated herein. Signed by Judge Raymond L. Acosta
on 2/22/06. (ans) (Entered: 02/22/2006)

https://ecf.prd.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/DktRpt.pl?763982730250674-L_923_0-1

5/21/2007

CM/ECF LIVE - U.S. District Court for the District of Puerto Rico - Docket Report

Page 4 of 6

03/08/2006 03/08/2006 04/12/2006 04/27/2006
05/31/2006 06/07/2006 08/01/2006 09/01/2006 09/11/2006
09/20/2006

19 INFORMATIVE Motion regarding ENLARGEMENT OF TIME filed byEnrique J. Mendoza-Mendez on behalf of all defendants (MendozaMendez, Enrique) (Entered: 03/08/2006)
20 ORDER denying without prejudice at this time 19 MOTION for enlargement of time. Signed by Judge Raymond L. Acosta on 3/8/06. (ans) (Entered: 03/08/2006)
21 JOINT STATUS REPORT Joint by United States Equal Employment Opportunity Commission. (Von Greiff, Carla) Modified to add text on 8/15/2006 (su, ). (Entered: 04/12/2006)
22 Minute Entry of Status/Settlement Conference held on 4/20/2006.
Discovery deadlines were set. Jury Trial was set for 12/5/2006 at 9:30 AM in RLA's Courtroom. Pretrial/Settlement Conference was set for 11/30/2006 at 2:00 PM in RLA's Chambers. The JOINT Proposed Pretrial Order is due by 11/17/2006. Trial Brief is due by 12/1/2006, etc., as stated herein.
Signed by Judge Raymond L. Acosta on 4/26/06. (ans) (Entered: 04/27/2006)
23 MOTION to Compel Financial Worth Discovery filed byCarla J. Von Greiff on behalf of United States Equal Employment Opportunity Commission Suggestions in opposition/response due by 6/13/2006 (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit 1# 2 Exhibit 2# 3 Exhibit 3# 4 Exhibit 4# 5 Exhibit 5# 6 Exhibit 6)(Von Greiff, Carla) (Entered: 05/31/2006)
24 RESPONSE to Motion to Compel filed by all defendants Re: 23 MOTION to Compel Financial Worth Discovery filed by United States Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, (Mendoza-Mendez, Enrique) (Entered: 06/07/2006)
25 ORDER granting 23 Motion to Compel. Answers due by 8/21/06. Signed by Judge Raymond L. Acosta on 8/1/06. (ans) (Entered: 08/01/2006)
26 MOTION for extension of time until 9/27/06 to file dispositive motion filed byEnrique J. Mendoza-Mendez on behalf of Lupis Enterprises Inc. Suggestions in opposition/response due by 9/14/2006 (Mendoza-Mendez, Enrique) Modified to add text on 9/26/2006 (su, ). (Entered: 09/01/2006)
27 MOTION for extension of time until October 27, 2006 to Respond to Defendant's Motion For Summary Judgment And To Extend Case Management Deadlines filed byCarla J. Von Greiff on behalf of United States Equal Employment Opportunity Commission Suggestions in opposition/response due by 9/25/2006 (Von Greiff, Carla) (Entered: 09/11/2006)
28 ORDER GRANTING 26 MOTION for extension of time, GRANTING 27 MOTION for extension of time to Respond to Defendant's Motion For Summary Judgment and to Extend Case Management Deadlines.
Proposed Joint Pretrial Order is due by 1/19/2007. Trial Brief is due by 2/9/2007. Jury Trial is reset for 2/13/2007 at

https://ecf.prd.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/DktRpt.pl?763982730250674-L_923_0-1

5/21/2007

CM/ECF LIVE - U.S. District Court for the District of Puerto Rico - Docket Report

Page 5 of 6

09/27/2006
09/27/2006 09/29/2006 10/11/2006 10/19/2006

9:30 AM. Pretrial/Settlement Conference is reset for 1/26/2007 at 3:00 PM, etc. as stated herein. Signed by Judge
Raymond L. Acosta on 9/20/06. (ans) (Entered: 09/20/2006)
29 MOTION for Summary Judgment filed byEnrique J. Mendoza-Mendez on behalf of all defendants Suggestions in Opposition to Summary Judgment due by 10/10/2006. (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit Defendant's Statement of Facts# 2 Exhibit 1 Re Defendant's Statement of Facts (Harrassment Policy Janessa Hammerle)# 3 Exhibit 2 Re Defendant's Statement of Facts (Harrassment Policy Yadira Rivera)# 4 Exhibit 3 Re Defendant's Statemento of Facts (Harrassment Policy Lissette Betancourt)i# 5 Exhibit 4 Re Defendant's Statement of Facs (Harrassment Policy Tania I. Cruz)# 6 Exhibit 5 Re Defendant's Statement of Facts (Letter 26-09-03)# 7 Exhibit 6 Re Defendant's Statement of Facts (Letter from Mr. Jose. O. Ortiz to Eduardo Figueroa 03-10-03)# 8 Exhibit 7 Re Defendant's Statement of Facts (Harrassment Policy Jose O. Ortiz)# 9 Exhibit 8 Re Defendant's Statement of Facts (Disciplinary Advertence Lissette Betancourt 03-18-03)# 10 Exhibit 9 Re Defendant's Statement of Facts (Lissette Betancourt 04-03-03)# 11 Exhibit 10 Re Defendant's Statement of Facts (Lissette Betancourt 04-1803)-# 12 Exhibit 11 Re Defendant's Statement of Facts (Disciplinary Advertence Lissette Betancourt 07-15-03)# 13 Exhibit 13 Re Defendant's Statement of Facts (Disciplinary Advertence Lissette Betancourt 07-2603)# 14 Exhibit 12 Re Defendant's Statement of Facts (Disciplinary Advertence Lissette Betancourt 07-26-03)# 15 Exhibit 14 Re Defendant's Statement of Facts (Disciplinary Advertence Lissette Betancourt 09-1403)# 16 Exhibit 15 Re Defendant's Statement of Facts (Disciplinary Advertence Lissette Betancourt 10-10-03)# 17 Exhibit 16 Re Defendant's Statement of Facts )Policy for Dismissal))(Mendoza-Mendez, Enrique) (Entered: 09/27/2006)
30 MOTION for Extension of Time to File Translations filed byEnrique J. Mendoza-Mendez on behalf of all defendants Suggestions in opposition/response due by 10/10/2006 (Mendoza-Mendez, Enrique) (Entered: 09/27/2006)
31 ENDORSED ORDER GRANTING 30 Motion for Extension of Time to File Translations. Translations due by 10/31/06. Signed by Judge Raymond L. Acosta on 9/29/06. (ans) (Entered: 09/29/2006)
32 Consent MOTION for Extension of Time until November 30, 2006 to file File Plaintiff's Response to Defendant's Motion For Sumary Judgment Due to Conditional Settlement filed byCarla J. Von Greiff on behalf of United States Equal Employment Opportunity Commission Suggestions in opposition/response due by 10/24/2006 (Von Greiff, Carla) (Entered: 10/11/2006)
33 ORDER GRANTING 32 Consent MOTION for Extension of Time.
Status Report due by 11/20/2006. Response to Motion due by 11/30/2006. Signed by Judge Raymond L. Acosta on 10/19/06. (ans)
(Entered: 10/19/2006)

https://ecf.prd.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/DktRpt.pl?763982730250674-L_923_0-1

5/21/2007

CM/ECF LIVE - U.S. District Court for the District of Puerto Rico - Docket Report

Page 6 of 6

10/31/2006
11/20/2006 11/30/2006 12/05/2006 12/21/2006

34 MOTION Submitting Certified English Translations re:29 MOTION for Summary Judgment filed by Lupis Enterprises Inc., filed byEnrique J. Mendoza-Mendez on behalf of Lupis Enterprises Inc. (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit 5# 2 Exhibit 6# 3 Exhibit 8# 4 Exhibit 9# 5 Exhibit 10# 6 Exhibit 11# 7 Exhibit 12# 8 Exhibit 13# 9 Exhibit 14# 10 Exhibit 15# 11 Exhibit 16)(Related document(s)29) (Mendoza-Mendez, Enrique) Modified to add text on 11/6/2006 (su, ). (Entered: 10/31/2006)
35 STATUS REPORT Joint by United States Equal Employment Opportunity Commission. (Von Greiff, Carla) (Entered: 11/20/2006)
36 Joint MOTION For Approval of Consent Decree filed byCarla J. Von Greiff on behalf of United States Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit Consent Decree)(Von Greiff, Carla) (Entered: 11/30/2006)
37 ENDORSED ORDER NOTED 34 Motion submitting translations. Signed by Judge Raymond L. Acosta on 12/5/06. (ans) (Entered: 12/05/2006)
38 CONSENT JUDGMENT in the amount of $55,000.00 . Signed by Judge Raymond L. Acosta on 12/20/06. (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit A-Lupis Anti-Discrimination Policy# 2 Exhibit B- Notice to all employees Posted pursunt to Consent Decree between the parties# 3 Exhibit C - Monetary Distribution)(su, ) (Entered: 12/21/2006)

PACER Service Center
Transaction Receipt

05/21/2007 12:45:24

PACER Login: hs0328

Client Code: eeoc

Description: Docket Report Search Criteria: 3:04-cv-02031-RLA

Billable Pages: 4

Cost:

0.32

https://ecf.prd.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/DktRpt.pl?763982730250674-L_923_0-1

5/21/2007


[CONTENT] EEOC | Miami | Lupis Enterprises, Inc. | Puerto Rican | the Lupis Mexican Grill & Sports Cantina | September 30, 2004 | District Court | Puerto Rico ||| EEOC | Lupis | four | one ||| Lupis | September 2006 ||| December 21, 2006 ||| Lupis | Title VII | Title VII ||| Lupis | 55,000 | four ||| two years ||| 2008 [SUMMARY] The EEOC's Miami district office filed suit against Lupis Enterprises, Inc., the Puerto Rican parent company of the Lupis Mexican Grill & Sports Cantina, on September 30, 2004 in the U.S. District Court for the District of Puerto Rico.  The EEOC's complaint alleged that Lupis violated Title VII when it engaged in discrimination based on sex (female) against four employees, providing a hostile work environment, unfair scheduling, and retaliated against one of the employees when she complained by firing her.  Lupis filed a motion for summary judgment in September 2006 which was never resolved.  The parties entered into a consent judgment on December 21, 2006.  The consent judgment enjoined Lupis from future discrimination and required development of a policy against sexual harassment, Title VII compliance training for managerial and supervisory staff and posting of notice of compliance with Title VII.  The consent judgment further required Lupis to pay $55,000 in damages to the four aggrieved employees. The decree was to last for two years. The docket sheet doesn't show any further enforcement took place; the case was presumably closed in 2008.

