IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS
EASTERN DIVISION

EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY )

COMMISSION,

)

)

Plaintiff,

)

)

v.

)

)

BICE 01<' CHICAGO, INC., BICE

)

RESTAURANT GROUP, LLC, DA ECIB

)

USA, INC., D/B/A THE BICE GROUP,

)

ITALlAN, RG, INC.

)

)

Defendant!;.

)

)

CIVIl" ACTION NO.
Jury Trial DemandedjUDGE MANNING
2708
MAatSTRATE JUI:>G6 BOBRICK

NATURE OF THE ACTION

This is an action under Title Vll ofthe Civil Rights Act of 1964, as amended, 42

U.S.C. § 2000e ct~. ("Title Vll"), and Title Tof the Civil Rights Act of 1991 to correct

unlaw ful employment practices on the basis of sex and national origin and to provide

appropriate relief to a class oC current and former employees who wcre adversely affected by

such practices. Plaintiff Equal Employment Opportunity Commission ("EEOC") alleges that

Bice of Chicago, Inc., and Bicc Restaurant Group, LLC, Da Ecib USA, Tnc., d/b/a The Bice

Group, Italian RG hlC. (collectively "Bice") subjected Hugo Gonzalez, Victor Gonzalez,

Javier Padilla, Carlos Hernandez, DeidTe Fennessy, Jose Labra, Alejandro Padilla, Fernando

Munoz, Uriel Porcayo, Felix Marquez, Heladio Gonzalez, ,lesus Gonzalez, Luis Arco~ and

Juan Vasquez (collectively referrcd to hereafter as "Charging Parties") and a class of

employees to different tcn1lS and conditions of employmcnt because of their national origin,

non-Italian and/oT Hispanic. EEOC also alleges that Bice subjected some Charging Parties

and a class of male employees to sexual harassment. EEOC further alleges that Biee retaliated against Charging Parties and a class of employees by subjecting them to di ffcrent terms and conditions of employment, constructively discharging them andlor discharging them, in
violation of Title V II.
JURISDICTION AND VENUE I. 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(£)(1) and (3)
ofTitie VII, 42 U.S.c. § 2000e-5(£)(l) and (3) and &102 ofthe Civil Rights Act or 1991, 42 U.S.c. § 1981A.
2. The employment practices hercafter alleged to be unlawful were and arc now being committed within the jurisdiction of the United States District Court for the Northern District of Illinois, Eastern Division.
PARTIES 3. Plaintiff, the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, is an agency orthe United States of America charged with the administration, interpretation, and enforcement or Title VII and is expressly authorized to bring this action by Section 706(£)(1) and (3) ofTitle VIT, 42 U.S.C. Section 2000e-5(f)(l) and (3).
-2-

._------,
4. At all times relevant, Defendants Bice of Chicago, Inc,; Bicc Restaurant Group, LLC; Da Ecib USA, Inc., dlb/a The Bice Group; and Italian RG Inc. (collectively "Bice"), have continuously been doing business in the Northem District of Illinois and have continuously had at least fifteen employees.
5. At all times relevant, Bice has continuously been an employer engaged in an industry affecting commerce within the meaning of Sections 701 (b), (g) and (h) of Title Vll, 42 U.S.C. Sections 2000c(b), (g) and (h).
STATEMENT OF CI,AIMS 6. More than thirty days prior to the institution of this lawsuit, Charging Parties
filed charges with the Commission alleging violations oeTitlc VII by Bice. All conditions
precedent to the institution ofthis lawsuit have been fulfilled. 7. Sillce at least .lanuaty 1998, Bice has engaged in unlawful employment
practices at its Chicago, Illinois restaurant, in violation of Sections 701(k) and 703(a) of Title VTI, 42 U.S.c. Sections 2000e(k) and 2(a), Such unlawful employment practices have included: I) subjecting Charging Parties and a class of employees to different terms and conditions of employment because of their national origin, non-Italian and/or Hispanic; 2) subjecting some Charging Parties and a class of male employees to sexual harassment; 3) retaliating against Charging Parties and a class of employees by subjecting them to different terms and conditions of employment, constructively discharging them and/or
-3-

-------.
va discharging them, in violation of Titlc because (hey complained about national origin
harassment andlor sexual harassment by their supervisor. 8. The effect of the practices complained of above has becn to deprive Charging
Parties, and a class of employees adversely affected by (he discriminatory actions, of equal employment opportunities and otherwise adversely affect their status as employees because of their sex and national origin.
9. The unlawful employment practices complained of in paragraphs 7 and 8 above were intentional.
10. The unlawful employment practices complained of in paragraphs 7 and 8 above were done with malice or with reckless indifference to the federally protected rights of Charging Parties and a class of employees becausc oftheir sex (male) and national origin (non-Italian andlor Hispanic).
PMYER J<'OR RELIEF WHEREFORE, the Commission respectfully requests that this Court: A. Grant a permanent injunction enjoining Defendants, their officers, successors, assigns, and all persons in active concert or participation with them, from engaging in any employment practice which discriminates because of sex and national origin. B. Order Defendants to institute and carry out policies, practices and programs which eradicate the effects of its past and present unlawful practices. C. Order Defendants to make whole Charging Parties and the afl'ected classes by providing appropriate back pay with prejudgment interest, in amounts to be de\cnnined at
-4-

j'
trial, and other affirmative reliefneecssary to eradicate the effects of its unlawful cmployment practices, including reinstatement where appropriate.
D. Order Defendants to make whole Charging Parties and the affected classes, by providing compensation for past and futLtre pecuniary losses rcsulting from the unlawful employment practices described in paragraphs 7 and 8 above, including medical expenses, in amounts to be determined at trial.
E. Order Defendants to make whole Charging Parties and the affected classes by providing compensation for past and future non-pecuniary losses resulting from the unlawful practices complained of in paragraphs 7 and 8 above, including emotional pain, inconvenience, and humi.liation, in amounts to be determined at trial.
F. Order Defendants to pay Charging Parties and the affected classes PLlllitive damagcs for their malicious and reckless conduct described in paragraphs 7 and 8 above, in amounts to be determined at triaL
G. Grant such further relief as the Court deems necessary and proper in the public interest; and
H. Award the Commission its costs in this action.
-5-

JURY TRIAL DEMAND
The Commission requests a jury trial on all questions offact raised by its complaint.
Respectfully submitted,
Eric S. Dreiband General Counsel
James Lce Deputy General Counsel
Gwendolyn Young Reams Associate General Counsel
EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY COMMISSION IJ'..S:a-ec~W . .C. 507
I
~~~¥Diane 1. Smasoll Supervisory Trial Attorney
PaIncia S. Moore-G' bs Trial Attorney EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY
COMMISSION Chicago District Office 500 West Madison Street Suitc 2800 Chicago, TIlinois 60661 (312) 886-9120
-6-

Civil Cover Sheet

Page 101 L

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS I,f"' "

Civil Cover Sbeet

, " /." "

(' /II:A,

TI,lS autQma d lS-44 conform, generally to the manual JS-44 approved by the ludicial Conference ofthe United Stales in Seplember 19 4. The data is required for the use of the Clerk of Court for the purpose of initiating the civil cloch! ,heet. The infonnation contained herein neither replace, nor supplements the filing and service of pleadings or other papers as required by law. 'fbi, form is authorized foJ' use "'lily in the NortbcI'tl Uistrict of lllinois.

Plaintiff(s): EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY COMMISSION

Defendant(s):BICE OF CHICAGO, INC., BICE RESTAURANT GROUP, LLC, DAECIB USA, INC., D/B/A THE BICE GROUP, ITALIAN, RG, INC.

County of Residence:

County of Residence: Cook

Plaintif!'s Atly:

Pamela S. Moore-Gibbs

Defendant's Atty:

Eqllal Employment Opportllnity

Commission

500 W. Madison Street., Suite

2800 Chicago, IL 60661

(312) 886-9120

James B. Noonan, Patrick J.
McCann Noonan & Liebenllan, Ltd. 105 W. Adan1s, Suite 3000, Chicago, lL GOG03 (3\2) 431-1455

-'\',I",,,!,\'\"":HNUI,,'PI:,.",{1:1,,,,'.,',,,·'",'H)"".,,·',,\"m"1,fN·:!\"·'1I~1"!\"w\~"\'.,'\,\I"\''''\'\''\i''\''\"',\i"!''''I\I\''''''':''''I\'''''\''rl\'''>'w~m''''Wi!\''''\'.'>"':".,\,\'."':""::#'''':''11,1).1 """"""",,,"' """'"":":1<11"".'''''11'''''''(1) ,,',_,,"'"11.11<,:,,',\/1.• ill','Ii.""',ji\:",,,i

U. Ba~s Qf J_urisd~lion: /c~1:·-U;S. Gov't Piainti!fuOGE MANNING

lU. Citi"eQshjp QfI>JinciR~1 c..-./
I'.art,es (Diversity Ca.e. Only)

04 C 2 70 8 . ~,' (j~ ;: ',;~~\ \:

Plaintiff:- NtA

"~:.,-~,,-,"

Defendant:- N/A

":.n._",""\:',.,
... ~,.~'"
,-"""
\"~ :.~J
.;.""

1. Original Proceeding

V,. Natl!reQf S_llil: VLC[\.us>.l of "-,,tiQn:

&P10yment
~ is an action nnder Title vn of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, as amended, 42 U.S.c. § 2000e et seq. (ItTitle VUlt), and Title I of the

Civil Rights Act of 1991 to correct the nnlawful employment practices on the basis of sell and national origin.

VT!.., R,,,,questedjn CO!J1Rlaint

Class Action:

Dollar Demand:

Jury Demand:Yes

VUI. This case IS_NOT a retiling of a previously dismissed case.

http://www.ilnd.uscourts.gov/PUBLICfForms/auto js44.cfm

\ / L----
4/15/2004

UNlTE.D STATES .DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN .DISTlUCT OF ILLINOIS

In tile Matter of

EASTERN DIVISION

Equal Employment OppOltunity Commission v. Bice of Chicago, Inc., Bice Restaurant Group, LLC, DA RCIB USA, Inc., DlniA The Bice Group, Italian, RG, lnc.

JUDGE MANNING
ri' (',;:\1[
2 7 0 8 d;s~1J"C

APPEARANCES ARE IIERERY fiLED BY THE UNDERSIGNED AS ATTORNEY(S) FOR:

U.S. EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY COMMISSION MAmSTRAl}:; UIDGEiKlbtllCK

(A)

(B)

t-J,\MF. Pamela S. MoorC-~bbS
fIRM Equal Employment OpPOltunity Cummission 500 W, Madison, Suite 2800
CITY/STATF.'.!:\I'
Chicago, 1L 60661
TI:LCPIIONE !IIuMBE,R
ii-MAll. A1JDJl.E$S

Diane I. Smason

Equal Employment Opportunity COlnmissioll

STRF,F,T AuDRf~!; 500 W. Madison, Suite 2800

ClTYIS'l'~,TMll'
Chicago, IL 60661

Tel ,F.I'Ht):.jJ3 NlMHER
312·353·7526

IFAX NUMREH 3 j 2-35:\-8555

~:·MAIL ADlJRIiSS

IDF.NTIFICAT]ON NlJMIIDR (!lEE ITc..."I4 (IN ItC\,Iill:~~)
ARDe: No. 06197710

M(}'MBI;=,R OF TRLb,\, HAK)

'It:::s

D

NO

I NAM' Jo/{n C..ffeJdricksOD
FIRM t'Il'1"u, al Employment Opporlunity Commission
\ ST""7'" 500 W. Madison, Suite 2800 __ ,,1M" Chicago, TL 60661
I'fJLEPI-[(,lN": NL'MBF,R
312-353-8551
E-MAII.I\1JDR.ESii

IUJ2NTlfl(:ATION NUl\~ HE!{ (SIiE In:M 4 ON RE.vF,Riil:::j
ARDe No. 06226130
MI':MDER 01-' TfUAL BAR'/

TI~IAI. ATIO\tNEY')

YES

DESlfiNI\T(D AS InCALCOI.INSf:.L? iil(;NAT\IRI-:

n:s
(D)

o 0 NO

'" o

o

:-.If)

o

(:IT'I/STATF..'J:lf' TF.I.Ef'll0NE: NIIMI:lIiR

c~-
c.n
C",::~,
(j; ".
-.,-"-",,--
'".~-~
,- ., .:

I~:::;')

-.-~
._,-, ."

"'"
: .. ;"1

.. ,

, '~1

'--

;

1l.l[NTIFICAT10N \l1,IM1:IL>[{ (SEF, 1'1'1:::1'.1 1 01' REVI;RSEj
ARDe No. all H7589

MEMBER Of TR1AI.IIAR7

YES

~

NO

0

TRIAl, ATTORNf,Y"!

0 YIiS 1!1 NO

DI'::'>IGNATFD AS LOCAl, COCN::;FI.'I

y.:s 0 NO 0

InENTIP1CATIOK NUMB!,:,II. (Sl:::~ ITEM 4 ()t-; R/!V[fl!:>F.)

.\1IiMflF,R Of' 1'RlPo 1, BAR·! TRIAL ATTORI\.f,Y? nl-:~IGNATF.IJ AS LOCAI.(,:IIUNSEl?

'II-,S

0

YF:-i

0

YF.ii

~

/"'

NO 0 NO 0 NO 0

 </s> AC

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS
EASTERN DIVISION

EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY COMMISSION,
Plaintiff,
v.
BICE OF CHICAGO, INC., BICE RESTAURANT GROUP, LLC, DA ECIB USA, INC., D/B/A THE BICE GROUP, ITALIAN, RG, INC.
Defendants.

)
l
) )
Case No. 04 C 2708

I

Judge Manning Magistrate Judge Mason

l

CONSENT DECREE The Litigation
Plaintiff, Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (hereafter the "EEOC"), filed this action on April 20, 2004, alleging that Defendants Bice of Chicago, Inc., Bice Restaurant Group, LLC, Da Ecib USA, Inc., d/b/a The Bice Group, and Italian, RG Inc. (collectively "Defendants") discriminated against fourteen (14) Charging Parties and a class of employees, in violation of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, as amended, 42 U.S.C. § 2000e et seq. ("Title VII"), and § 102 of the Civil Rights Act of 1991, 42 U.S.C. § 1981A, by subjecting them to harassment and a hostile work environment because of their sex (male) and national origin (non-Italian). As a result of the parties having engaged in settlement discussions, the parties have agreed that this action should be finally resolved by entry of this Consent Decree. Unless otherwise noted in this Consent Decree, "Bice" and "Defendant" shall refer only to Bice of Chicago, Inc, not the other named defendants. This Consent Decree is intended to and does fully and finally resolve any and all claims arising out of the Complaint.

Findings Having examined the tenns and provisions of this Consent Decree and based on the pleadings, records, and stipulations of the parties, this Court finds the following: A. This Court has jurisdiction over the subject matter of this action and over the parties. B. The tenns and provisions of this Consent Decree are fair, adequate, reasonable, equitable and just. The rights of the parties are adequately protected by this Consent Decree. C. This Consent Decree confonns with the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure and Title VII. The entry of this Consent Decree will further the objectives of Title VII and will be in the best interest of the parties and the public. D. NOW THEREFORE, IT IS ORDERED, ADJUDGED AND DECREED THAT:
Non-Discrimination 1. In all matters arising from or relating to employment, Bice shall comply with Title VII and will not discriminate on the basis of sex or national origin.
Non-Retaliation 2. Bice, its officers, agents, employees, successors, and assigns shall not retaliate against, penalize or otherwise prejudice any employee, fonner employee or applicant for employment because such person has opposed any practice made unlawful by Title VII; filed a Complaint or Charge of Discrimination; testified, assisted, or otherwise participated in any manner in any investigation, proceeding, hearing or litigation under Title VII; asserted any right under this Consent Decree; or otherwise exercised his or her rights under Title VII.
-2-

Monetary Relief 3. Bice shall pay monetary damages in the sum of $2 10,000.00 to Hugo Gonzalez, Victor Gonzalez, Heladio Gonzalez, Jesus Gonzalez, Javier Padilla, Jose Labra, Luis Arcos, Carlos Hernandez, Deidre Fennessy, Alejandro Padilla, and Felix Marquez (referred to collectively as "Class Members"). Within thirty (30) calendar days of the execution of the Consent Decree, or after EEOC has provided Bice a Release Agreement (attached as Exhibit A to this Consent Decree) executed by the Class Members, whichever is later for each individual Class Member, Bice shall pay the Class Members a total amount of$50,000 in the manner listed below. Within seven (7) months of the execution of the Consent Decree, Bice shall pay the Class Members an additional total amount of$80,000 in the manner listed below. Within fourteen (14) months of the execution of the Consent Decree, Bice shall pay the Class Members an additional total amount of $80,000 in the manner listed below.

Name

First Payment

Hugo Gonzalez

$5,357.14

Victor Gonzalez

$5,357.14

Heladio Gonzalez

$5,357.14

Jesus Gonzalez

$5,357.14

Uvaldo Padilla (a.k.a. $5,357.14

Javier Padilla)

Jose Labra

$5,357.14

Luis Arcos

$5,357.14

Carlos Hernandez

$5,357.14

Deidre Fennessy

$2,380.96

Alejandro Padilla

$2,380.96

Felix Marquez

$2,380.96

Total

550,000

Second Payment $8,571.43 $8,571.43 $8,571.43 $8,571.43 $8,571.43

Third Payment $8,571.43 $8,571.43 $8,571.43 $8,571.43 $8,571.43

$8,571.43 $8,571.43 $8,571.43 $3,809.52 $3,809.52 $3,809.52 580,000

$8,571.43 $8,571.43 $8,571.43 $3,809.52 $3,809.52 $3,809.52 580,000

·3·

Bice shall issue, by certified mail, checks payable to the claimants at the addresses for each Class Member provided to Bice by EEOC. Defendants shall send a copy of the checks to EEOC. These amounts represent compensatory damages, from which no federal tax withholdings will be made and for which Bice shall issue IRS Forms 1099.
If any of the Class Members, for whatever reason, are unable to claim the entire monetary payment listed above, the portion of their monetary settlement that they did not receive shall be dispersed by Bice among the other Class Members as EEOC deems appropriate and as EEOC directs Bice to do.
Bice Restaurant Group, LLC, Da Ecib USA, Inc., d/b/a The Bice Group, and Italian, RG Inc. shall be guarantors for the payments described in this paragraph. Should, for any reason, Bice not be able to make the payment described in this paragraph, Bice Restaurant Group, LLC, Da Ecib USA, Inc., d/b/a The Bice Group, and Italian, RG Inc. shall be jointly and severally responsible for paying the Class Members the remaining balance of the monetary relief.
Notice Posting 4. Within ten (10) days after the Court's entry of this Consent Decree and for the duration of this Decree, Bice shall continuously post the notice annexed hereto as Exhibit B in locations prominently visible to Bice employees. Within ten (10) days after the Consent Decree is entered Bice shall certify in writing to the Chicago District Office of the EEOC that the Notice has been posted, and shall inform the EEOC of the locations where it has been posted. Bice shall permit a representative of EEOC to enter Bice's premises for purposes of verifying compliance with this Paragraph at any time during normal business hours without prior notice.
Record Keeping and Reporting 5. Bice shall maintain records of any complaints, formal or informal, oral or in
-4-

-~
writing, it receives relating to harassment based on sex and national origin, including the name, address, telephone number and social security number of the complainant and what was alleged, its investigation and any action taken by Bice in response to such complaints relating to its Chicago, Illinois restaurant, for the duration of the Consent Decree.
6. Beginning six (6) months after entry of this Consent Decree and every six (6) months thereafter for the duration of the Consent Decree, Bice shall furnish EEOC with reports reflecting the information detailed in the records described in Paragraph 5 of this Consent Decree. Bice's last report will be submitted to EEOC two (2) weeks prior to the date on which the Decree is to expire.
7. For the term of the Consent Decree and upon five (5) business days' notice to Bice, the EEOC, when it has reasonable cause to believe Bice is not in compliance with the terms of this Consent Decree, shall have reasonable access to Bice's facility during normal business hours to review and copy any documents related to determining compliance at its facility and to interview any personnel employed by Bice for the purpose of determining Bice's compliance with the terms of this Consent Decree.
Adoption of Non-HarassmentlDiscrimination Policy 8. Within twenty-eight (28) calendar days of the date of the entry of this Consent Decree, Bice shall submit to EEOC a policy against harassment and discrimination based on sex and national origin which complies with Title VII and which provides for a complaint process and mechanism for responding to such complaints. Within fourteen (14) calendar days of the Commission's receipt of the policy, and after any good faith comments EEOC makes to Bice regarding its policy are taken into consideration, Bice will distribute a copy of the policy to each employee. At the same time, it will post a copy of the policy at Bice. The inclusion of this
-5-

paragraph in the Decree does not represent the Court's or EEOC's approval ofBice's policy. Training
9. During each of the two (2) years covered by this Decree, Bice shall arrange for annual training of all employees, including supervisors and managers, regarding the requirements of Title VII and Bice' s policies prohibiting discrimination under Title VII. Bice shall submit to EEOC for approval, materials regarding the training sessions, including the credentials of the trainer and proposed training program, prior to such training. Within five (5) days after the completion of the training described above, Bice will certify to EEOC that the training has been completed, the name(s) of the person(s) conducting the training, the time(s), duration and date(s) the training were held and a list identifying by name and position all individuals who received the training. The first training shall take place within forty-five (45) days after entry of this Consent Decree.
Duration of Decree/Retention of Jurisdiction 10. The terms of this Consent Decree shall be in effect (and the Court will retain jurisdiction of this matter to enforce this Decree) for a period of two (2) years from the date on which this Consent Decree is entered, provided, however, that if, at the end of the two (2) year period, there are disputes that remain unresolved, and written notice is given by the party claiming that such dispute(s) remain unresolved, the term of the Decree shall be automatically extended until such time as all such disputes have been resolved.
Costs and Attorneys' Fees II. Each party to this action shall bear its own attorney's fees, costs, and expenses.
Dispute Resolution 12. If EEOC has reasonable cause to believe that Defendants have violated any of the
·6·

tenns of this Consent Decree, EEOC shall notify Defendants in writing and Defendants will then have ten (10) business days in which to satisfy EEOC that there has not been a violation or that the violation has been corrected. If, at the expiration of such time period, EEOC has not been so satisfied, then EEOC may immediately apply to the Court for appropriate relief.
13. When this Consent Decree requires the submission by Defendants of reports, notices, or other materials to the Commission, such materials shall be mailed to: Bice Settlement, Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, Chicago District Office, Legal Division, 500 West Madison, Suite 2800, Chicago, Illinois 60661.
·7·

ENTERED AND APPROVED FOR: For the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission:
JAMES LEE Deputy General Counsel
GWENDOLYN YOUNG REAMS Associate General Counsel EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY COMMISSION 1801 L. Street, N.W. Washington, D.C. 20507
Regional Attorney

For Defendants: Bice of Chicago, Inc., Bice Restaurant Group, LLC, Da Ecib USA, Inc., d/b/a The Bice Group, Italian
a,./)RG Inc. 1--f'lA n
onan oonan Liebennan, Ltd. 105 West Adams Street Suite 3000

ran Brown

Con

rown, LLC

'----,rn-t"West Adams Street

Suite 3000

Chicago, Illinois 60603

(312) 789-9700

Diane 1. Smason Supervisory Trial Attorney

~J.!lc~-~ Pamela S. Moo~Gibbs Trial Attorney

Equal Employment Opportunity Commission

Chicago District Office

500 West Madison Street, Suite 2800

Chicago, Illinois 60661

(312) 886-9120
Date:~

__ ENTER: __~I1~~~~~~~~~~ Honorable Blanche M ing United States District Judge

-8-

EXHIBIT A RELEASE AGREEMENT In consideration for _ _ _ _ paid to me by Defendants, in connection with the resolution of EEOC v. Bice of Chicago. Inc.. and Bice Restaurant Group. LLC. Da Ecib USA. Inc.. d/b/a The Bice Group. Italian RG Inc., Case No. 04 C 2708 (N.D.Ill.), I waive my right to recover for any claims of sexual harassment andlor national origin discrimination andlor constructive discharge under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, as amended, 42 U.S.c. § 2000e et seq. ("Title VII"), and § 102 of the Civil Rights Act of 1991, 42 U.s.C. § 1981A, that I had against Defendants prior to the date of this release and that were or could have been included in the claims alleged in EEOC's complaint in EEOC v. Bice of Chicago, Inc.. and Bice Restaurant Group. LLC. Da Ecib USA. Inc.. d/b/a The Bice Group. Italian RG Inc., Case No. 04 C 2708. I understand that it shall be my sole responsibility to provide current contact information to EEOC in order to facilitate the receipt of all monies. My failure to provide current contact information, which may result in non-receipt of monies, will not render this Release void.

Date

Signature

EXHIBITB NOTICE TO ALL BICE EMPLOYEES
This Notice is posted pursuant to the Consent Decree entered by the u.S. District Court resolving the lawsuit entitled EEOC v. Bice of Chicago. Inc.. and Bice Restaurant Group. LLC. Da Ecib USA. Inc.. d/b/a The Bice Group. Italian RG Inc.. Case No. 04 C 2708, filed by the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission ("EEOC") against Bice.
In its complaint, EEOC alleged that Bice discriminated against employees by subjecting them to a hostile work environment based on sex and national origin and retaliated against them. Bice filed an answer denying these allegations. To resolve the case, Bice and EEOC have entered into a Consent Decree which provides, among other things, that:
1) Bice will pay monetary relief totaling $210,000 to the alleged victims of harassment;
2) Bice is enjoined from discriminating against employees on the basis of sex and national origin or subjecting them to harassment based on sex and national origin;
3) Bice is enjoined from retaliating against any person because (s)he opposed any practice made unlawful by Title VII, filed a Title VII charge of discrimination, participated in any Title VII proceeding or asserted any rights under the Consent Decree;
4) Bice will implement a policy against discrimination and harassment based on sex and national origin. Bice will also implement a complaint policy and a mechanism for responding to complaints;
5) Bice will provide mandatory training to employees regarding sexual and national origin harassment, retaliation, and Bice's policies regarding such discrimination.
Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, as amended, prohibits employers from discriminating on the basis of sex, race, color, religion or national origin. The Equal Employment Opportunity Commission is the agency responsible for enforcing Title VII.
THIS IS AN OFFICIAL NOTICE AND MUST NOT BE DEFACED OR REMOVED
This Notice must remain posted for two (2) years from the date shown below and must not be altered, defaced or covered by any other material. Any complaints of discrimination or questions concerning this Notice or compliance with its provisions may be directed to the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, 500 West Madison Street, Suite 2800, Chicago, Illinois 60661, (312) 353-2713.
Dated:_~7/,+I~L-I'l!/LtjLtJ~_ (' _
United States District Court

 </s> E.E.O.C. v. Bice of Chicago, 229 F.R.D. 581 (2005)
229 F.R.D. 581 United States District Court,
N.D. Illinois.
EEOC v.
BICE OF CHICAGO
No. 04 C 2708. | July 18, 2005.
Attorneys and Law Firms
*582 Pamela Sue Moore-Gibbs, Aaron R. DeCamp, Diane Ilene Smason, John C. Hendrickson, Chicago, IL, for Equal Employment Opportunity Commission.
James V. Noonan, Patrick J. McCann, II, Noonan & Lieberman, Jeffrey Grant Brown, Jeffrey Grant Brown, P.C., Chicago, IL, for Bice of Chicago.
Opinion
MANNING, District Judge.
As further stated in this order, the EEOC’s motion for a protective order [25] is granted. Defendants’ motion to compel [23] is granted in part and denied in part.
STATEMENT
Before the Court is defendants’ motion to compel deponent Uvaldo Padilla and all other deponents in this litigation to disclose their citizenship and country of birth; arrest and criminal history; activities, including before, during and after their employment with defendants; alias names used in employment; and to answer questions surrounding their use of such aliases. Also before us is EEOC’s motion for entry of protective order barring all discovery relating to the charging parties’ immigration status. These motions overlap considerably and therefore, we will consider them together.
[1] The EEOC’s motion for a protective order barring all discovery relating to the *583 charging parties’ immigration status is granted. We find that the immigration status of the charging parties is not relevant to the claims or defenses in this case. These parties are not seeking front pay, back pay, lost wages or benefits. Moreover, we find good cause exists to enter this protective order because questions about immigration status are oppressive, they constitute a substantial burden on the parties and on the public interest and they would

have a chilling effect on victims of employment discrimination from coming forward to assert discrimination claims. Rivera v. Nibco, Inc., 364 F.3d 1057, 1065 (9th Cir.2004) (finding that the chilling effect on employees’ ability to challenge workplace discrimination warranted a protective order precluding discovery into the immigration status of the employees which would only be potentially relevant). Defendants argue that the EEOC is trying to prevent them from verifying who the deponents are and that the deponents are actually the persons whom they purport to be. We disagree. Defendants can verify who the deponents are and that the deponents are actually the persons whom they purport to be without asking questions relating to the deponents’ immigration status.
[2] Defendants argue that the charging parties’ credibility is directly relevant and therefore, they should be able to inquire about falsification of identity and immigration status. Again, we disagree. While specific instances of conduct can be used to attack a party’s character for truthfulness, we still find that there is no need to inquire into a charging party’s immigration status. Defendants can inquire about whether aliases or false names were used and whether a party falsified his or her identity in order to attack a deponent’s credibility. However, there is no need to ask questions surrounding the use of aliases or questions surrounding the falsification of identity. If the point is to establish a party’s propensity for dishonesty, that can be established by the mere fact that the party used a false name or falsified records to obtain employment. There is no need to delve into why the deponent engaged in such untruthful conduct.
[3] Accordingly, the EEOC’s motion for a protective order barring all discovery relating to the charging parties’ immigration status is granted. While defendants can verify who the deponents are and can inquire about whether aliases or false names were used and whether a party falsified his or her identity, defendants cannot question the deponents about their immigration status (nor can they ask the specific questions referenced on pgs. 5-6 of the EEOC’s motion).
With respect to defendants’ motion to compel, the motion is granted in part and denied in part. The request for an order compelling deponent Uvaldo Padilla and all other deponents in this litigation to disclose their citizenship and country of birth; activities, including employment, before, during and after their employment with defendants; and to answer questions surrounding their use of such aliases is denied. As stated above, defendants can inquire about alias names used in employment. However, we will not compel the deponents to disclose their citizenship and country of birth or to answer questions surrounding their use of such aliases because that information is irrelevant and unnecessary to establish a party’s propensity for
1

E.E.O.C. v. Bice of Chicago, 229 F.R.D. 581 (2005)
dishonesty.
[4] With respect to defendants’ motion to compel all deponents in this litigation to disclose their arrest and criminal history, the motion is granted in part. Evidence of arrests and other prior misconduct are not admissible unless the bear on a witnesses truthfulness. Newsome v.

McCabe, 2002 WL 548725, *10 (N.D.Ill.2002). Therefore, we find that defendants are only allowed to ask questions regarding arrests and convictions which would be admissible at trial for impeachment purposes.
	
  

2

 </s> CM/ECF LIVE, Ver 3.0 - U.S. District Court, Northern Illinois - Docket... https://ecf.ilnd.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/DktRpt.pl?443406957240746-L_35...
CLOSED, MASON, PROTO
United States District Court Northern District of Illinois - CM/ECF LIVE, Ver 3.0 (Chicago)
CIVIL DOCKET FOR CASE #: 1:04-cv-02708

EEOC v. Bice of Chgo Inc, et al Assigned to: Hon. Blanche M. Manning Demand: $0 Cause: 42:2000e Job Discrimination (Employment)

Date Filed: 04/15/2004 Date Terminated: 04/18/2006 Jury Demand: Both Nature of Suit: 442 Civil Rights: Jobs Jurisdiction: U.S. Government Plaintiff

Plaintiff
Equal Employment Opportunity Commission

represented by Pamela Sue Moore-Gibbs United States Equal Employment Opportunity Commission 500 West Madison Street Suite 2800 Chicago, IL 60661 (312) 353-7568 Email: pamela.moore-gibbs@eeoc.gov LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

Aaron R. DeCamp Equal Employment Opportunity Commission 500 W. Madison Street 2800 Chicago, IL 60661 (312)353-7582 Email: aaron.decamp@eeoc.gov ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

Diane Ilene Smason United States Equal Employment Opportunity Commission 500 West Madison Street Suite 2800 Chicago, IL 60661 (312) 353-7568 Email: diane.smason@eeoc.gov ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

John C. Hendrickson United States Equal Employment Opportunity Commission 500 West Madison Street Suite 2800

1 of 7

5/24/2007 11:10 AM

CM/ECF LIVE, Ver 3.0 - U.S. District Court, Northern Illinois - Docket... https://ecf.ilnd.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/DktRpt.pl?443406957240746-L_35...

V. Defendant Bice of Chicago, Inc.
Defendant Bice Restaurant Group, LLC

Chicago, IL 60661 (312) 353-8551 Fax: (312) 353-8555 Email: john.hendrickson@eeoc.gov ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
represented by James V. Noonan Noonan & Lieberman 105 West Adams Street Suite 3000 Chicago, IL 60603 (312) 431-1455 Email: jnoonan@noonanandlieberman.com LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
Jeffrey Grant Brown Jeffrey Grant Brown, P.C. 105 West Adams Street Suite 3000 Chicago, IL 60603 (312) 789-9700 Email: jgbrownlaw@sbcglobal.net ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
Patrick J McCann, II Noonan & Lieberman 105 West Adams Street Suite 3000 Chicago, IL 60603 (312) 431-1455 Email: pmccann@noonanandlieberman.com ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
represented by James V. Noonan (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
Jeffrey Grant Brown (See above for address) ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

2 of 7

5/24/2007 11:10 AM

CM/ECF LIVE, Ver 3.0 - U.S. District Court, Northern Illinois - Docket... https://ecf.ilnd.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/DktRpt.pl?443406957240746-L_35...

Defendant DA ECIB USA, Inc.

Patrick J McCann, II (See above for address) ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
represented by James V. Noonan (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
Jeffrey Grant Brown (See above for address) ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
Patrick J McCann, II (See above for address) ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

Date Filed 04/15/2004
04/19/2004
05/07/2004 05/17/2004 06/24/2004 06/29/2004 06/30/2004 07/06/2004 07/08/2004

#

Docket Text

1 COMPLAINT; jury demand - Civil cover sheet - Appearance(s) of John C. Hendrickson, Diane Ilene Smason, Pamela Sue Moore-Gibbs as attorney(s) for plaintiff ( 0 summons(es) issued.) ( Documents: (1-1 through 1-3)) (gcy) (Entered: 04/16/2004)
SCHEDULE set on 4/19/04 by Hon. Blanche M. Manning : Status hearing set to 10:00 7/9/04. Plaintiff's counsel should be prepared to advise the court regarding the progress of efforts to serve the defendants. Mailed notice (rth) (Entered: 04/19/2004)
2 WAIVER of service of summons as to defendant Bice of Chgo Inc sent on 04/15/04. (jmp) (Entered: 05/11/2004)
3 WAIVER of service of summons as to Bice of Chgo Inc sent on 4/15/04. (gcy) (Entered: 05/17/2004)
4 MOTION by defendants for enlargement of time to answer or plead ; Notice. (gcy) (Entered: 06/25/2004)
6 NOTICE by defendants of motion for enlargment of time to answer or plead. (gcy) (Entered: 07/07/2004)
5 INITIAL STATUS REPORT by plaintiff; Notice. (gcy) (Entered: 07/01/2004)
7 MINUTE ORDER of 7/6/04 by Hon. Blanche M. Manning : Status hearing re-set for 8/13/04 at 10:00 a.m. Defendants' motion for enlargement of time to 7/8/04 to answer or plead is granted [4-1]. Mailed notice (gcy) (Entered: 07/07/2004)
8 ANSWER by defendants to complaint [1-1]; jury demand; Notice. (gcy) (Entered: 07/09/2004)

3 of 7

5/24/2007 11:10 AM

CM/ECF LIVE, Ver 3.0 - U.S. District Court, Northern Illinois - Docket... https://ecf.ilnd.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/DktRpt.pl?443406957240746-L_35...

07/14/2004
07/19/2004
07/22/2004 08/20/2004 08/26/2004 08/27/2004 10/28/2004 10/28/2004
10/29/2004 11/09/2004 12/09/2004 12/14/2004
01/20/2005

9 REFERRAL ORDER of 7/14/04 The case is referred to the Honorable Magistrate Judge Michael T. Mason from Honorable Judge Blanche M. Manning. The reasons for my recommendation are: To conduct hearings and enter appropriate orders on the following pretrial motion/matter. Discovery supervision. Settlement conference. Perform such additional duties as are not inconsistent with the Constitution and laws of the United States, as specifically set forth. Exceptions or additions: All nondispositive pretrial motions. (For further detail see order.) Mailed notice (hp) (Entered: 07/15/2004)
SCHEDULE set on 7/19/04 by Honorable Michael T. Mason: This matter having been referred to Magistrate Judge Mason, an initial status hearing is set for 8/26/04 at 9:00 a.m. in courtroom 2214. The parties shall deliver a file-stamped courtesy copy of an initial status report providing the information required by the enclosed Order Setting Initial Status Report to the courtroom deputy, room 2220, by 8/20/04. Mailed notice (kef) (Entered: 07/19/2004)
SCHEDULE set on 7/22/04 by Hon. Blanche M. Manning : Status hearing reset to 10:00 10/29/04 . Mailed notice (rth) (Entered: 07/22/2004)
10 INITIAL STATUS REPORT by parties; Notice. (gcy) (Entered: 08/23/2004)
SCHEDULE set on 8/26/04 by Honorable Michael T. Mason : Status hearing held and continued to 11/9/04 at 9:00 a.m. EEOC is ordered to identify all potential class members by 11/5/04. Mailed notice (kef) (Entered: 08/26/2004)
11 ATTORNEY APPEARANCE for defendants by James V. Noonan, Patrick J McCann II, Jeffrey Grant Brown; Notice. (gcy) (Entered: 08/30/2004)
12 MOTION by plaintiff to extend discovery to identify class members ; Notice. (gcy) (Entered: 10/29/2004)
13 MINUTE ORDER of 10/28/04 by Honorable Michael T. Mason : EEOC's motion to extend discovery to identify class members until 12/10/04 is granted [12-1]. Status hearing set for 11/9/04 at 9:00 a.m. is reset to 12/14/04 at 9:00 a.m. No appearance is required on the noticed motion date of 11/2/04. Mailed notice by judge's staff (gcy) (Entered: 10/29/2004)
SCHEDULE set on 10/29/04 by Hon. Blanche M. Manning : Status hearing held and continued to 11:00 11/9/04 . Mailed notice (rth) (Entered: 10/29/2004)
SCHEDULE set on 11/9/04 by Hon. Blanche M. Manning : Status hearing held and continued to 10:00 1/21/04 . Mailed notice (rth) (Entered: 11/09/2004)
14 ATTORNEY APPEARANCE for plaintiff by Aaron R. DeCamp. (gcy) (Entered: 12/10/2004)
SCHEDULE set on 12/14/04 by Honorable Michael T. Mason : Status hearing held and continued to 2/10/05 at 9:00 a.m. Fact discovery ordered closed on 4/13/05. Parties are urged to contact the courtroom deputy, 312/435-6051, if/when there is interest in scheduling a settlement conference. Mailed notice (kef) (Entered: 12/14/2004)
15 MINUTE entry before Judge Blanche M. Manning : Status hearing reset for 3/25/2005 at 10:00 AM. Notices mailed by judge's staff. (rth, ) (Entered: 01/20/2005)

4 of 7

5/24/2007 11:10 AM

CM/ECF LIVE, Ver 3.0 - U.S. District Court, Northern Illinois - Docket... https://ecf.ilnd.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/DktRpt.pl?443406957240746-L_35...

01/26/2005 02/10/2005 03/28/2005 03/28/2005 03/30/2005
06/22/2005 06/23/2005 06/29/2005 06/29/2005 07/01/2005 07/01/2005 07/06/2005
07/07/2005 07/07/2005

16 MINUTE entry before Judge Blanche M. Manning : Status hearing reset for 4/29/2005 at 10:00 AM. Notices mailed by judge's staff. (rth, ) (Entered: 01/26/2005)
17 MINUTE entry before Judge Michael T. Mason : Status hearing held on 2/10/2005 and continued to 4/13/05 at 9:00 a.m. Notices mailed by judge's staff (kef, ) (Entered: 02/10/2005)
18 MOTION by Plaintiff for enlarge time for discovery to 8/31/05. (air, ) (Entered: 03/28/2005)
19 NOTICE of Motion by Pamela Sue Moore-Gibbs for presentment of motion for extension of time for discovery 18 before Honorable Blanche M. Manning on 4/5/2005 at 09:00 AM. (air, ) (Entered: 03/28/2005)
20 MINUTE entry before Judge Michael T. Mason : EEOC's joint motion to enlarge time for discovery 18 is granted. Fact discovery cut-off is extended to 8/31/05. NO FURTHER EXTENSIONS. Status hearing set for 4/13/05 is stricken and reset to 6/22/05 at 9:00 a.m. No appearance is required on the noticed motion date of 4/5/05. Judicial staff mailed notice (kef, ) (Entered: 03/30/2005)
21 MINUTE entry before Judge Michael T. Mason : Magistrate Judge Status hearing held on 6/22/2005 and continued to 8/31/05 at 9:00 a.m. Judicial staff mailed notice (kef, ) (Entered: 06/22/2005)
22 AGREED MOTION by Defendants for Rule 26(c)(7) protective order; Notice. (gcy, ) (Entered: 06/28/2005)
23 MOTION by Defendants to compel response to discovery pursuant to Rule 37(a) (gma, ) (Entered: 06/29/2005)
24 NOTICE of Motion by defendants for presentment of MOTION by Defendants to compel response to discovery pursuant to Rule 37(a) 23 before Honorable Michael T. Mason on 7/7/2005 at 09:00 AM. (gma, ) (Entered: 06/29/2005)
25 MOTION by Plaintiff for entry of protective order (gma, ) (Entered: 07/05/2005)
26 NOTICE of Motion by Pamela Sue Moore-Gibbs for presentment of MOTION by Plaintiff for entry of protective order 25 before Honorable Michael T. Mason on 7/7/2005 at 09:00 AM. (gma, ) (Entered: 07/05/2005)
27 MINUTE entry before Judge Michael T. Mason : Plaintiff's response to defendant's motion to compel 23 and defendant's respones to plaintiff's motion for protective order 25 to be filed by 7/11/05, no longer than 5 pages, courtesy copy to chambers, room 2206. No reply. Ruling by mail. No appearance is required on the noticed motion date of 7/7/05. Judicial staff mailed notice (kef, ) (Entered: 07/06/2005)
28 MINUTE entry before Judge Michael T. Mason : Defendants' agreed motion for Rule 26(c)(7) protective order is granted. Enter Protective Order. Mailed notices (gcy, ) (Entered: 07/11/2005)
29 PROTECTIVE Order Signed by Judge Michael T. Mason on 7/7/2005:(gcy, ) (Entered: 07/11/2005)

5 of 7

5/24/2007 11:10 AM

CM/ECF LIVE, Ver 3.0 - U.S. District Court, Northern Illinois - Docket... https://ecf.ilnd.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/DktRpt.pl?443406957240746-L_35...

07/11/2005 07/11/2005 07/18/2005 07/22/2005 07/22/2005 07/27/2005
09/21/2005 11/01/2005 11/02/2005 11/10/2005 11/15/2005 12/02/2005 12/13/2005

30 OPPOSITION to plaintiff's motion for entry of protective order; Notice. (gcy, ) (Entered: 07/14/2005)
31 RESPONSE by EEOC to defendants' motion to compel response to discovery. (Exhibits). (gcy, ) (Entered: 07/14/2005)
32 MINUTE entry before Judge Michael T. Mason : As further stated in this order, the EEOC's motion for a protective order 25 is granted. Defendants' motion to compel 23 is granted in part and denied in part. Notices mailed by judge's staff (gcy, ) (Entered: 07/19/2005)
33 JOINT MOTION by Plaintiff to enlarge time for discovery (gma, ) (Entered: 07/22/2005)
34 NOTICE of Motion by Pamela Sue Moore-Gibbs for presentment of JOINT MOTION by Plaintiff to enlarge time for discovery 33 before Honorable Michael T. Mason on 7/27/2005 at 09:00 AM. (gma, ) (Entered: 07/22/2005)
35 MINUTE entry before Judge Michael T. Mason : Motion hearing held on 7/27/2005. Parties' joint motion to enlarge time for discovery 33 is granted. Fact discovery extended to 9/30/05. Status hearing set for 8/31/05 is stricken and reset to 9/21/05 at 9:00 a.m. The Court will not entertain any further motions to enlarge time for discovery. Judicial staff mailed notice (kef, ) (Entered: 07/27/2005)
36 MINUTE entry before Judge Michael T. Mason : Magistrate Judge Status hearing held on 9/21/2005 and continued to 11/1/05 at 9:00 a.m. Fact discovery cutoff extended to 11/18/05. Judicial staff mailed notice (kef, ) (Entered: 09/21/2005)
37 MINUTE entry before Judge Michael T. Mason : Magistrate Judge Status hearing held on 11/1/2005. Settlement Conference set for 11/9/2005 at 02:00 PM. Parties are to submit copies of their settlement position letters to the courtroom deputy, room 2220, by 11/7/05. Mailed notice (kef, ) (Entered: 11/01/2005)
38 MINUTE entry before Judge Michael T. Mason : Settlement Conference set for 11/9/05 is stricken and reset to 11/10/2005 at 09:30 AM. Parties are to submit their settlement position letters to the courtroom deputy, room 2220, no later than 11/8/05. Mailed notice (kef, ) (Entered: 11/02/2005)
39 MINUTE entry before Judge Michael T. Mason : Settlement conference held on 11/10/2005. Parties are to contact the courtroom deputy, 312/435-6051, by close of business on 11/14/05 to inform the Court as to how the parties wish to proceed with settlement negotiations. (kef, ) (Entered: 11/10/2005)
40 MINUTE entry before Judge Michael T. Mason : Status hearing set for 12/6/2005 at 09:00 AM. (kef, ) (Entered: 11/15/2005)
41 MINUTE entry before Judge Michael T. Mason : At the parties' request, status hearing set for 12/6/05 is stricken and reset to 12/13/05 at 9:00 a.m. (kef, ) (Entered: 12/02/2005)
42 MINUTE entry before Judge Michael T. Mason : Magistrate Judge Status hearing held on 12/13/2005 and continued to 1/12/06 at 9:00 a.m. (kef, ) (Entered: 12/13/2005)

6 of 7

5/24/2007 11:10 AM

CM/ECF LIVE, Ver 3.0 - U.S. District Court, Northern Illinois - Docket... https://ecf.ilnd.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/DktRpt.pl?443406957240746-L_35...

01/12/2006 01/30/2006 02/09/2006
02/17/2006 03/03/2006
04/12/2006 04/12/2006 04/18/2006 04/18/2006

43 MINUTE entry before Judge Michael T. Mason : Magistrate Judge Status hearing held on 1/12/2006 and continued to 2/2/06 at 9:00 a.m. (kef, ) (Entered: 01/12/2006)
44 MINUTE entry before Judge Michael T. Mason : On the Court's own motion, status hearing set for 2/2/06 is stricken and reset to 2/9/06 at 9:00 a.m. (kef, ) (Entered: 01/30/2006)
45 MINUTE entry before Judge Michael T. Mason : Magistrate Judge Status hearing held on 2/9/2006. Continued Settlement Conference set for 3/2/2006 at 09:30 AM in courtroom 2214. Parties should submit supplemental settlement position letters to the courtroom deputy, room 2220, by 2/27/06. (kef, ) (Entered: 02/09/2006)
46 MINUTE entry before Judge Michael T. Mason : Continued Settlement Conference set for 3/2/06 is stricken and reset to 3/3/2006 at 10:30 AM. (kef, ) (Entered: 02/17/2006)
47 MINUTE entry before Judge Michael T. Mason : Continued Settlement conference held on 3/3/2006. Parties were able to reach an agreement to settle the case. Parties are advised to submit their consent decree to Judge Manning. All matters relating to the referral of this case having been resolved, the referral is closed and the case is returned to the assigned judge. Judge Michael T. Mason no longer referred to the case. (kef, ) (Entered: 03/03/2006)
48 MOTION by Plaintiff Equal Employment Opportunity Commission to approve consent judgment (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit 1)(DeCamp, Aaron) (Entered: 04/12/2006)
49 NOTICE of Motion by Aaron R. DeCamp for presentment of motion to approve consent judgment48 before Honorable Blanche M. Manning on 4/18/2006 at 11:00 AM. (DeCamp, Aaron) (Entered: 04/12/2006)
50 MINUTE entry before Judge Blanche M. Manning: Joint motion for entry of consent decree 48 is granted. Consent decree is entered in the sum of $210,000.00. Enter Consent Decree. Civil case terminated. Mailed notice (hp, ) (Entered: 05/01/2006)
51 CONSENT DECREE Signed by Judge Blanche M. Manning on 4/18/2006:Mailed notice(hp, ) (Entered: 05/01/2006)

PACER Service Center

Transaction Receipt

05/24/2007 11:09:40

PACER Login: hs0328

Client Code: eeoc

Description: Docket Report Search Criteria: 1:04-cv-02708

Billable Pages: 4

Cost:

0.32

7 of 7

5/24/2007 11:10 AM


[CONTENT] EEOC | Chicago District Office | Bice of Chicago, Inc. | The Bice Group | Italian RG Inc. | April 15, 2004 | District Court | the Northern District | Illinois ||| EEOC | Bice | Hispanic | non-Italian ||| June and July of 2005 | nearly a dozen | Magistrate | Michael T. Mason ||| April 18, 2006 | Bice | 210,000 | annual | Title VII | semiannual | EEOC | Title VII | EEOC ||| 2 years ||| 2008 [SUMMARY]  The EEOC's Chicago District Office sued Bice of Chicago, Inc., d/b/a The Bice Group, Italian RG Inc., on April 15, 2004 in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Illinois.  The EEOC's complaint alleged that Bice violated Title VII when it discriminated against a group of employees based on race (Hispanic/non-Italian) and sex (male) by providing disparate conditions of employment, a sexually harassing atmosphere, and constructively or actually discharged numerous employees in retaliation for their complaints.  The case proceedings included a few discovery disputes, filed in June and July of 2005, and nearly a dozen status hearings and settlement conferences over the course of the case, nearly all of which were presided over by Magistrate Judge Michael T. Mason. The parties entered into a consent decree on April 18, 2006 which stipulated that Bice would pay $210,000 in damages to the complainants; develop, post and distribute a revised anti-discrimination/harassment policy; provide annual Title VII compliance training for its employees; provide semiannual reports to the EEOC concerning Title VII violation complaints; and allow EEOC inspectors access to its files and employees to ensure compliance with the consent decree. The settlement term was 2 years. The docket sheet does not show any further enforcement; the case was presumably closed in 2008.

