Case 5:06-cv-06141-PVT Document 1 Filed 09/29/2006 Page 1 of 4

1 WILLIAM R. TAMAYO - #084965 (CA)

JONATHAN T. PECK - #12303 (VA)

2

MARCIA L. MITCHELL - #18122 (WA)

EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY COMMISSION

3

San Francisco District Office

350 The Embarcadero, Snite 500

4

San Francisco, CA 94105

Telephone No. (415) 625-5651

5

Fax No. (415) 625-5657

6

Attorneys for Plaintiff

7

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

8

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

9

SAN JOSE DIVISION

10 EQUAL EMPLOYMENT

~

CIVIL ACTION NO.

0 f5 6141' 11

OPPORTUNITY COMMISSION, v. Plaintiff,

~ .

.,
JI

~--:r

-"~"":7'

12

~

COMPLAINT

.-

13 TRIMBCO, INC. d/b/a Sharp Precision) Civil Rights

Manufacturing,

)

- Employment Discrimination

14

)

Defendant.

) JURY TRIAL DEMAND

1

)

17 NATURE OF THE ACTION
18 This is an action under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and Title I of the Civil
19 Rights Act of 1991 to correct unlawful employment practices on the basis of sex and to provide
20 appropriate relief to Charging Party, Anna Valdez McAllister, and other similarly situated
21 individuals who were adversely affected by such practices. As alleged below, defendant
22
Trimbco, Inc. d/b/a Sharp Precision Manufacturing subjected the claimants to a hostile work 23
enviromnent based on sex, female, and national origin, Hispanic. 24
JURISDICTION AND VENUE 25
1. Jurisdiction ofthis Court is invoked pursuant to 28 U.S.c. §§451, 1331, 1337, 26
1343, and 1345. This action is authorized and instituted pursuant to §706(f)(1) and (3) of Title 27
VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, as amended (Title VII), 42 U.S.C. §2000e-5(f)(1) and (3), 28
and §102 ofthe Civil Rights Actofl991, 42U.S.C. §1981a.
COMPLAINT

Case 5:06-cv-06141-PVT Document 1 Filed 09/29/2006 Page 2 of 4

I

2. The employment practices alleged to be unlawful were and are now being

2

committed in San Jose, California, within the jurisdiction of the United States District Court for

3

the Northern District of California.

4

PARTIES

5

3. Plaintiff, the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC), is the agency

6

of the United States of America charged with the administration, interpretation, and enforcement

7

of Title VII and is expressly authorized to bring this action by §706(f)(1) and (3) of Title VII, 42

8

U.S.C. §2000e-5(f)(I) and (3).

9

4. At all relevant times, Defendant is and was a corporation doing business in the

10 State of California, and has continuously had at least IS employees.

11

5. At all relevant times, Defendant has continuously been an employer engaged in an

12 industry affecting commerce, within the meaning of §701(b), (g), and (h) of Title VII, 42 U.S.C.

13 § 2000e(b), (g), and (h)..

14

STATEMENT OF CLAIMS

IS

6. More than thirty days prior to the institution of this lawsuit, Anna Valdez

16 McAllister filed a charge of discrimination with the EEOC alleging violations of Title VII by

17 Defendant. All conditions precedent to the institution ofthis lawsuit have been fulfilled.

18

7. Since at least February 1999, Defendant has engaged in unlawful practices at its

19 San Jose, California location in violation of §703(a)(I) of Title VII, 42 U.S.C. §2000e-2(a)(I).

20 These practices, which continued on a regular basis, included subjecting Defendant's employees

21 to harassment on the basis of their sex, female, and/or national origin, Hispanic, which created an

22 offensive, abusive, intimidating, and hostile work environment.

23

8. The effect of the practices complained of in paragraph 7 above has been to deprive

24 the employees of equal employment opportunities and to otherwise adversely affect them because

25 oftheir sex, female and/or national origin, Hispanic.

26

9. The unlawful employment practices complained of in paragraph 7 above were and

27 are intentional.

28

10. The unlawful employment practices complained of in paragraph 7 above were

done with malice and/or reckless indifference to the federally protected rights of the employees.

COMPLAINT

2

Case 5:06-cv-06141-PVT Document 1 Filed 09/29/2006 Page 3 of 4

1

PRAYER FOR RELIEF

2

WHEREFORE, the Commission respectfully requests that this Court:

3

A. Grant a pennanent injunction enjoining Defendant, its officers, successors,

4

assigns, and all persons in active concert or participation with them, from engaging in harassment

5

based on sex andlor national origin and any other employment practice which discriminates on

6

the basis of sex andlor national origin.

7

B. Order Defendant to institute and carry out policies, practices, and programs which

8

provide equal employment opportunities for its employees and which eradicate the effects of its

9

past and present unlawful employment practices.

10

C. Order Defendant to make whole the employees by providing compensation for

11 past and future pecuniary losses resulting from the unlawful employment practices described

12 above, with interest, in amounts to be determined at trial.

13

D. Order Defendant to make whole the employees by providing compensation for

14 past and future non-pecuniary losses caused by the above unlawful conduct, including pain and

15 suffering, emotional distress, indignity, loss of enjoyment of life, loss of self-esteem, and

16 humiliation, in amounts to be detennined at trial.

17

E. Order Defendant to pay the employees punitive damages for its malicious and

18 reckless conduct described above, in amounts to be detennined at trial.

19

F. Grant such further relief as the Court deems proper.

20

G. Award the Commission its costs in this action.

21 III

22 III

23 III

24 III

25 III

26

27

28

COMPLAINT

3

Case 5:06-cv-06141-PVT Document 1 Filed 09/29/2006 Page 4 of 4

1

JURY TRIAL DEMAND

2

The Commission requests a jury trial on all questions of fact raised by its complaint.

3

Ronald S. Cooper

4

General Counsel

5

JamesL. Lee Deputy General Counsel

6

Gwendolyn Young Reams

7

Associate General Counsel

8

Equal Employment Opportunity Commission

9

1801 L Street, N.W. Washington, DC 20507

10

11

')1 , 12 Date: September

2006

13

14

15

16

17

18

Equal Employment Opportunity Commission

19

San Francisco District Office 350 The Embarcadero, Suite 500

20

San Francisco, California 94105-1260 Telephone: (415) 625-5651

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

COMPLAINT

4

 </s> 1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
9 NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
10 SAN JOSE DIVISION
11

12

EQUAL EMPLOYMENT

)

13 OPPORTUNITY COMMISSION,

)

)

14

Plaintiff,

)

)

15

v.

)

)

16 TRIMBCO, INC. dba. SHARP

)

PRECISION MANUFACTURING,

)

17

)

Defendants.

)

18 ___________________________________ )

Case No.: 06-6141 PVT
ORDER GRANTING PLAINTIFF EEOC’S MOTION FOR DEFAULT JUDGMENT

19 INTRODUCTION
20 The Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (hereinafter EEOC) filed a complaint
21 against Trimbco, Inc. dba Sharp Precision Manufacturing (hereinafter Trimbco), alleging Trimbco
22 subjected Anna Valdez McAllister and a class of individuals (collectively claimants) to a hostile
23 work environment based on sex and/or national origin.1 On July, 24, 2008, the court ordered
24 Trimbco to inform the court of its new counsel no later than August 25, 2008. Trimbco failed to
25 comply and EEOC later filed a motion for default judgment. On December 21, 2008, the EEOC
26 served Trimbco with the motion for default. Defendant Trimbco did not oppose or otherwise
27

28 1All parties have consented to the jurisdiction of a U.S. Magistrate Judge.

ORDER, page 1

1 respond to the motion. On February 3, 2008, EEOC appeared for hearing. Trimbco did not appear.

2 Having reviewed the papers and considered the arguments of counsel and for the reasons set forth

3 below, the court grants EEOC’s motion for default judgment.2

4

BACKGROUND

5

On September 29, 2006, plaintiff EEOC, on behalf of Anna Valdez McAllister and a class of

6 similarly situated employees, filed a complaint alleging defendant Trimbco subjected claimants to a

7 hostile work environment based on sex (female) and/or national origin (Hispanic). EEOC filed an

8 action under Section 706 of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. On June 27, 2008, Trimbco’s

9 counsel, Sweeney, Mason, Wilson & Bosomworth, filed a Motion to Withdraw as Attorney of

10 Record. The Court granted the motion on July 24, 2008 and further ordered Trimbco to inform the

11 court of its newly engaged counsel no later than August 25, 2008. Trimbco failed to comply with

12 the order. Subsequently, EEOC moved this Court for a default judgment against Trimbco pursuant

13 to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 55(b) based on its failure as a corporation to retain counsel.

14

In support of its motion, plaintiff EEOC filed six declarations from the claimants detailing

15 Trimbco’s alleged unlawful behavior as follows:

16

1. Liliana Aranda

17

Chuck Trimble, the owner and CEO of Trimbco, called Ms. Aranda a “bitch” on

18 numerous occasions and also made disparaging remarks about her national origin (Mexican). He

19 remarked, “You beaners are all the same.” Trimble also physically intimidated Ms. Aranda by

20 throwing documents at her, raising his voice, and looking her body up and down. When personnel

21 from human resources gave her permission to go home because her toddler had become seriously ill,

22 Trimble yelled at Ms. Aranda saying, “See, this is what I get for hiring bitches!” As a result, Ms.

23 Aranda suffered from depression and stress-induced migraine headaches. Her family life

24 deteriorated as she took her stress out on her husband and children.

25

2. Debra Garza

26

Trimble would flirt with Ms. Garza and comment about how her clothes fit. When she

27

28

2 The holding of this court is limited to the facts and the particular circumstances underlying the

present motion.

ORDER, page 2

1 did not return his flirtation, Trimble began calling her a “fucking idiot” or “fucking bitch.” Trimble

2 verbally berated Ms. Garza in front of her coworkers, customers, and suppliers. Trimble made

3 comments about people of Hispanic heritage to Ms. Garza, including “Cinco de Mayo is coming,

4 you know how these Mexicans get” and he made further derogatory remarks about “beaners.” Ms.

5 Garza woke up in a bad mood every morning, she stressed about the ridicule, she did not sleep well,

6 she vomited, and she developed irritable bowel syndrome. Also, she lost contact with her friends.

7

3. Laura Jennings

8

Trimble would flirt with Ms. Jennings in front of coworkers, causing her great

9 embarrassment. He repeatedly told Ms. Jennings that her office and her perfume smelled “like

10 lingerie.” She was forced to pay for Trimble’s escort services in her professional capacity. Trimble

11 begged Ms. Jennings to live with him. He also sent her two emails requesting that she live with him

12 and informing her that they would be magic in bed. Ms. Jennings told Ken Valencia, the general

13 manager, about receiving the emails and he told her that she should go out with Trimble. Trimble’s

14 actions at work affected her relationship at home with her husband. Ms. Jennings dreaded going to

15 work because she felt completely objectified. She felt like Trimble’s sex toy, leading to a general

16 distrust of men, extreme stress and anxiety.

17

4. Leilani Martinez

18

Ms. Martinez observed Trimble's behavior toward women in the office. She too, was

19 treated poorly throughout her employment at Trimbco. Trimble forced her to work up until the day

20 she delivered her child and then required her to return to work on a Saturday, three days after giving

21 birth. Trimble remarked to other employees that, “the baby is sucking her brains out.” Trimble

22 called Ms. Martinez “stupid” and repeatedly told her that she was incompetent. Trimble threw

23 objects in front of Ms. Martinez and made her work overtime and weekends without compensation.

24 Often she cried uncontrollably at work. As a result, Ms. Martinez suffered from diminished self

25 esteem and became anxious and jittery. She also experienced physical problems such as an irritable

26 bowel and vomiting.

27

5. Anna McAllister

28

Trimble bombarded Ms. McAllister with derogatory and sexist remarks. He called her

ORDER, page 3

1 names, including “bitch,” “ho,” “truck stop ho,” and called her breasts “jugs” and “tits.” In

2 addition, Trimble used derogatory names regarding Hispanics, such as “wetback,” “beaner,” “stupid

3 Mexican,” and “fucking lazy Mexican.” Trimble even offered Ms. McAllister to clients to perform

4 sexual favors. She informed Trimble she did not appreciate his harassing and insulting conduct, but

5 he did not stop. He told others such as Ms. Aranda that Ms. McAllister looked like a “ho” in some

6 outfits. Trimble’s comments caused Ms. McAllister to cry and suffer from low self-esteem. The

7 environment at work affected her personal life and changed relationships at home with her kids. She

8 suffered severe stress and anxiety.

9

6. Melinda Safford

10

Trimble called Ms. Safford names such as “fucker,” “stupid fucker,” “bitch,” and

11 “fucking moron.” He yelled and pointed his finger in her face. Trimble taunted Ms. Safford if she

12 started crying. He said, “I can’t help it if you’re a woman.” Trimble also called her “Chuck’s bitch”

13 and referred to her menstrual cycle. Trimble made her work late hours, sometimes more than 17

14 hours and complete the assignments her male coworkers did not finish. Trimble called her a

15 “Wagon Burner” when he found out about her Native American heritage. Trimble’s conduct and the

16 demeaning work environment at Trimbco caused Ms. Safford to cry at least three days a week after

17 work. She also suffered from lack of sleep, substantial weight gain, frequent vomiting and

18 depression.

19

DISCUSSION

20

A. Default Judgment

21

When a party against whom a judgment for affirmative relief is sought “has failed to plead or

22 otherwise defend, and that failure is shown by affidavit or otherwise, “the court must enter the

23 party’s default.” Fed. R. Civ. Proc. 55(a). A corporation may only appear in court through a

24 licensed attorney. Rowland v. California Men’s Colony, 506 U.S. 194 (1993) (citing Osborn v.

25 President of Bank of United States, 22 U.S. 738 (1824)); Taylor v. Knapp, 871 F.2d 803, 806 (9th

26 Cir. 1988). A federal district court may enter default judgment against a corporation for failure to

27 retain counsel to represent it. United States v. High Country Broadcasting Co., F.3d 1244, 1245 (9th

28 Cir. 1993). The factors the court may consider in ruling on a motion to enter default include: the

ORDER, page 4

1 substantive merits of plaintiff's claim; sufficiency of the complaint; the amount of money at stake;

2 the possibility of prejudice to plaintiff if relief is denied; the possibility of dispute as to any material

3 facts in the case; whether default resulted from excusable neglect; and the strong policy of the

4 Federal Rules of Civil Procedure favoring decisions on the merits. Eitel v. McCool, 782 F.2d 1470,

5 1471-1472 (9th Cir. 1986).

6

Trimbco failed to defend itself against this action by refusing to abide by the court’s July 24,

7 2008 order to obtain counsel. Indeed, since the withdrawal of counsel, Trimbco has not appeared

8 whatsoever. The court finds that EEOC has met the factors to support the entry of default judgment.

9 First, EEOC has established that prejudice to the Claimants would occur if default judgment was not

10 entered by the court. Because Trimbco failed to participate in these proceedings, the Claimants' only

11 recourse for the emotional distress caused by the hostile work environment at Trimbco is the court's

12 entry of default judgment.

13

Second, under Title VII of the 1964 Civil Rights Act, EEOC's claims are meritorious. EEOC

14 filed this action on behalf of a class of aggrieved applicants as deemed appropriate by General

15 Telephone Co. of the Northwest v. E.E.O.C., 46 U.S. 318, 324 (1980). Furthermore, EEOC stated a

16 claim upon which relief can be granted. Title VII makes it unlawful for an employer to discriminate

17 against an individual with respect to her conditions or privileges of employment on the basis of sex

18 and/or national origin. EEOC's complaint alleges a pattern of abuse and numerous instances of

19 sexual harassment and national origin harassment which created an offensive, abusive, intimidating,

20 and hostile environment. Said allegations deprived the Claimants of equal employment

21 opportunities. Moreover, upon entry of default, the complaint's factual allegations regarding liability

22 are taken as true. Geddes v. United Fin. Group, 559 F.2d 557, 560 (9th Cir. 1977). Therefore, there

23 are no factual disputes before the court.

24

Third, Trimbco has not shown excusable neglect. On July 29, 2008, former counsel served

25 Trimbco via email and mail with the order requiring it to obtain alternate counsel. The court stayed

26 the action for 30 days for Trimbco to obtain alternate counsel. Trimbco, however, failed to comply

27 with the court order, failed to hire an attorney, and failed to communicate with the court to

28 demonstrate any effort whatsoever to engage counsel. In addition, EEOC served all of the

ORDER, page 5

1 documents related to the motion for default judgment to Trimbco's last known business address as

2 well as to Chuck Trimble on December 21, 2008. Pursuant to EEOC's declaration, Trimbco

3 continues to conduct business in the area and therefore has no basis for failing to comply with this

4 Court's order (Declaration of Marcia L. Mitchell ¶ 4-5).

5

Fourth, public policy will not be harmed by granting EEOC's motion for default judgment.

6 Although the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure favor a ruling on the merits, such a decision cannot

7 be made in this instance. Trimbco has failed to hire alternate counsel and has made no effort to

8 demonstrate excusable neglect. As such, the facts alleged are uncontested. Therefore, default

9 judgment is appropriate here.

10

B. Remedies

11

Damages under Title VII may be recovered from a respondent who engaged in unlawful,

12 intentional discrimination in the form of compensatory and punitive damages. 42 U.S.C.

13 1981a(a)(1). In addition, monetary as well as injunctive relief strive to make whole the persons

14 injured by discriminatory conduct and to restore them as fully as possible to the position they

15 otherwise would have been absent discrimination. Franks v. Bowman Transportation Co., 424 U.S.

16 747, 763-64 (1976).

17

1. Compensatory Damages

18

Compensatory Damages may be awarded for the following injuries suffered by the

19 Claimants: "future pecuniary losses, emotional pain, suffering, inconvenience, mental anguish, loss

20 of enjoyment of life, and other nonpecuniary losses." 42 U.S.C. 1981a(b)(3). A victim's testimony

21 alone is a sufficient basis on which to award compensatory damages for emotional pain and

22 suffering. Chalmers v. City of Los Angeles, 762 F.2d 753, 761 (9th Cir. 1985). The statutory cap for

23 compensatory and punitive damages is $50,000.00 per claimant for an employer with 15 to 100

24 employees. 42 U.S.C. 1981a(b)(3)(A).

25

Accordingly, the court approves the Claimants' request for compensatory damages for the

26 emotional distress, pain, and suffering caused by Trimbco's discriminatory conduct. By declaration,

27 each Claimant has provided evidence of her severe emotional distress. Accordingly, the court shall

28 award each of the Claimants compensatory damages.

ORDER, page 6

1

2. Punitive Damages

2

Under Title VII, punitive damages may be recovered for cases involving intentional

3 discrimination where the complaining party demonstrates that Defendant engaged in egregious

4 discriminatory practices with malice or with reckless indifference to the federally protected rights of

5 an aggrieved individual. Kolstad v. American Dental Assoc., 527 U.S. 526 (1999); 42 U.S.C.

6 1981a(b)(1).

7

Based on the evidence presented, the court finds claimants have met this standard. EEOC

8 has demonstrated that Trimbco's owner, Chuck Trimble, engaged in a constant stream of abusive

9 statements and behavior toward the Claimants which was intentional, malicious, and willfully

10 disregarded their rights to be free from discrimination based on sex and/or national origin.

11 Accordingly, the court approves an award of compensatory and punitive damages in the amount of

12 $50,000.00 per claimant, totaling $300,000.00.

13

3. Injunctive Relief

14

The court may grant equitable relief to effectuate the purposes of Title VII 42 U.S.C. 2000e-

15 5(g). The Supreme Court recognized "Congress' purpose in vesting a variety of 'discretionary'

16 powers in the court was...to make possible the 'fashioning of the most complete relief possible.'"

17 Albermarle Paper Co. v. Moody, 422 U.S. 405, 421 (1975).

18

In an effort to prevent Trimbco from engaging in further harassment and discrimination, the

19 Court orders injunctive relief as requested by EEOC: (1) enjoining Trimbco, its officers, successors,

20 assigns, and all persons in active concert or participation with them, from engaging in harassment

21 based on sex and/or national origin; and (2) ordering Defendants to institute and carry out policies,

22 practices, and programs which provide equal employment opportunities for its employees and which

23 eradicate the effects of its past and present unlawful employment practice.

24

CONCLUSION

25

For the foregoing reasons, based on the unopposed motion, the briefs and supporting

26 documents submitted, and having heard the arguments of counsel,

27

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:

28

1. The U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission’s Motion for Default Judgment is

ORDER, page 7

1 granted;

2

2. Defendant shall pay to Liliana Aranda compensatory and punitive damages in the amount

3

of $50,000.00 (fifty-thousand dollars and no cents);

4

3. Defendant shall pay to Debra Garza compensatory and punitive damages in the amount of

5

$50,000.00 (fifty-thousand dollars and no cents);

6

4. Defendant shall pay to Laura Jennings compensatory and punitive damages in the amount

7

of $50,000.00 (fifty-thousand dollars and no cents);

8

5. Defendant shall pay to Leilani Martinez compensatory and punitive damages in the

9

amount of $50,000.00 (fifty-thousand dollars and no cents);

10

6. Defendant shall pay to Anna McAllister compensatory and punitive damages in the

11

amount of $50,000.00 (fifty-thousand dollars and no cents);

12

7. Defendant shall pay to Melinda Safford compensatory and punitive damages in the

13

amount of $50,000.00 (fifty-thousand dollars and no cents);

14

8. The total judgment for all claimants specified above shall total $300,000.00 (three

15

hundred thousand dollars and no cents);

16

9. Plaintiff shall serve this order and the judgment no later than 30 days from the date of

17

this order and defendant shall pay the above-specified amounts no later than 30 days after

18

service of the order and judgment;

19

10. Defendant, its officers, successors and assigns and all persons in active concert or

20

participation with them is hereby ENJOINED from engaging in harassment based on sex

21

and/or national origin and any other employment practice which discriminates on the basis of

22

sex and/or national origin.

23

11. Defendant is hereby ORDERED to institute and carry out policies, practices, and

24

programs which provide equal employment opportunities for its employees and which

25

26

27

28

ORDER, page 8

1

eradicate the effects of its past and present unlawful employment practices.

2

IT IS SO ORDERED.

3 Dated: March 17, 2009

4

PATRICIA V. TRUMBULL

5

United States Magistrate Judge

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

ORDER, page 9

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28
ORDER, page 10

 </s> Case: 5:06-cv-6141 As of: 06/03/2017 10:32 AM PDT 1 of 4
ADRMOP,CLOSED,E−Filing,MEDTERM
U.S. District Court California Northern District (San Jose) CIVIL DOCKET FOR CASE #: 5:06−cv−06141−PVT

Equal Employment Opportunity Commission v. Trimbco, Inc. Assigned to: Magistrate Judge Patricia V. Trumbull Cause: 42:1983 Civil Rights (Employment Discrimination)
Plaintiff

Date Filed: 09/29/2006 Date Terminated: 03/18/2009 Jury Demand: Plaintiff Nature of Suit: 442 Civil Rights: Jobs Jurisdiction: U.S. Government Plaintiff

Equal Employment Opportunity Commission

represented by Jonathan T. Peck U.S. EEOC 450 Golden Gate Ave POB 36025 San Francisco, CA 94102 415−522−3425 Fax: 415−625−5657 Email: Jonathan.Peck@eeoc.gov LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

Marcia L. Mitchell U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Comm'n 350 The Embarcadero Suite 500 San Francisco, CA 94105−1687 (415) 625−5651 Fax: 415−625−5657 Email: marcia.mitchell@eeoc.gov LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

William Robert Tamayo U.S. EEOC 450 Golden Gate Ave POB 36025 San Francisco, CA 94102 415−522−3425 Fax: 415−625−5657 Email: william.tamayo@eeoc.gov LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

V.
Defendant
Trimbco, Inc. doing business as Sharp Precision Manufacturing

represented by Roger Mark Mason Sweeney Mason Wilson & Bosomworth 983 University Avenue Suite 104C Los Gatos, CA 95032−7637 408/356−3000 Fax: 408−354−8839 Email: rmason@smwb.com TERMINATED: 07/24/2008 LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
Caitlin Elizabeth Kaufman

Case: 5:06-cv-6141 As of: 06/03/2017 10:32 AM PDT 2 of 4
Sweeney, Mason, Wilson & Bosomworth 983 University Avenue Suite 104C Los Gatos, CA 95032 408−356−3000 Fax: 408−354−8839 Email: ckaufman@smwb.com TERMINATED: 07/24/2008 ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
Kurt Edward Wilson Sweeney Mason Wilson & Bosomworth 983 University Ave Suite 104C Los Gatos, CA 95032−7637 408 356−3000 Email: kwilson@smwb.com ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

Date Filed 09/29/2006
09/29/2006 09/29/2006 09/29/2006 11/22/2006
11/27/2006 11/29/2006 12/13/2006 12/15/2006 01/03/2007 01/09/2007 01/16/2007

# Docket Text
1 COMPLAINT Civil Rights − Employment Discrimination against Trimbco, Inc. (Summons Issued); jury demand. Filed by Equal Employment Opportunity Commission. (Fee Waived) (bw, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 9/29/2006) Additional attachment(s) added on 10/3/2006 (bw, COURT STAFF). (Entered: 10/02/2006)
2 ADR SCHEDULING ORDER: Case Management Statement due by 1/2/2007. Case Management Conference set for 1/9/2007 02:00 PM. (bw, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 9/29/2006) (Entered: 10/02/2006)
Summons Issued as to Trimbco, Inc.. (bw, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 9/29/2006) (Entered: 10/02/2006)
CASE DESIGNATED for Electronic Filing. (bw, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 9/29/2006) (Entered: 10/02/2006)
3 ANSWER to Complaint FOR VIOLATION OF CIVIL RIGHTS, EMPLOYMENT DISCRIMINATION by Trimbco, Inc.. (Mason, Roger) (Filed on 11/22/2006) Text modified on 11/30/2006 to conform to document caption post by counsel (bw, COURT STAFF). (Entered: 11/22/2006)
4 Proof of Service of Summons by Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (Mitchell, Marcia) (Filed on 11/27/2006) Text modified on 11/30/2006 to conform to document caption post by counsel (bw, COURT STAFF). (Entered: 11/27/2006)
5 ADR Certification (ADR L.R. 3−5b) of discussion of ADR options (Mitchell, Marcia) (Filed on 11/29/2006) (Entered: 11/29/2006)
6 CONSENT to Proceed Before a US Magistrate Judge by Trimbco, Inc... (Mason, Roger) (Filed on 12/13/2006) (Entered: 12/13/2006)
7 CONSENT to Proceed Before a US Magistrate Judge by Equal Employment Opportunity Commission.. (Mitchell, Marcia) (Filed on 12/15/2006) (Entered: 12/15/2006)
8 JOINT CASE MANAGEMENT STATEMENT AND [PROPOSED] ORDER filed by Equal Employment Opportunity Commission. (Peck, Jonathan) (Filed on 1/3/2007) (Entered: 01/03/2007)
9 Minute Entry: Initial Case Management Conference held on 1/9/2007 before Judge Patricia V. Trumbull (Date Filed: 1/9/2007). (Tape #FTR.) (mpb, COURT STAFF) (Date Filed: 1/9/2007) (Entered: 01/09/2007)
10 CASE MANAGEMENT CONFERENCE ORDER. Signed by Judge Patricia V. Trumbull on January 12, 2007. (pvtlc2, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 1/16/2007) (Entered: 01/16/2007)

Case: 5:06-cv-6141 As of: 06/03/2017 10:32 AM PDT 3 of 4

01/18/2007 01/22/2007 02/05/2007
02/05/2007 03/12/2007 03/26/2007 06/08/2007 11/01/2007 11/02/2007 12/05/2007 12/13/2007 01/07/2008 01/22/2008 02/28/2008 02/29/2008
02/29/2008 03/24/2008 06/17/2008 06/27/2008

Per document # 10 CASE REFERRED to Mediation. (cmf, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 1/18/2007) (Entered: 01/18/2007)
11 ADR Clerk's Notice Appointing AnnaMary Gannon as Mediator. (cmf, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 1/22/2007) (Entered: 01/22/2007)
ADR Unit received OBJECTIONS to Notice of Appointment of Mediator AnnaMary Gannon re 11 ADR Clerks Notice Appointing Mediator by Equal Employment Opportunity Commission. (cmf, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 2/5/2007) (Entered: 02/05/2007)
12 ADR Clerk's Notice Vacating Appointment of Mediator, AnnaMary E. Gannon. (cmf, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 2/5/2007) (Entered: 02/05/2007)
13 ADR Clerk's Notice Appointing Carol L. Woodward as Mediator. (cmf, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 3/12/2007) (Entered: 03/12/2007)
14 ADR Clerk's Notice of Appointment of Co−mediator Daniel Bowling. (cmf, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 3/26/2007) (Entered: 03/27/2007)
Set/Reset Hearings: Mediation Hearing set for 7/25/2007 at 09:30 AM in Courtroom 7 at the San Jose Courthouse. (cmf, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 6/8/2007) (Entered: 06/08/2007)
15 STIPULATED Motion to Continue All Deadlines and (Proposed) Order by Equal Employment Opportunity Commission. (Mitchell, Marcia) (Filed on 11/1/2007) Text modified on 11/1/2007 (bw, COURT STAFF). (Entered: 11/01/2007)
16 STIPULATION AND ORDER to Continue Deadlines. Signed by Judge Patricia V. Trumbull on 11/2/07. (pvtlc2, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 11/2/2007) (Entered: 11/02/2007)
Set/Reset Hearings: Mediation Hearing set for 12/14/2007 at 10:00 AM in Courtroom 7 on the 4th Floor of the Federal Building in San Jose. (cmf, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 12/5/2007) (Entered: 12/05/2007)
ADR Remark: Mediation session scheduled for 12/14/2007 is off calendar and will be rescheduled. (cmf, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 12/13/2007) (Entered: 12/13/2007)
Set/Reset Hearings: Mediation Hearing rescheduled for 2/7/2008 at 10:00 AM. (cmf, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 1/7/2008) (Entered: 01/07/2008)
Set/Reset Hearings: Mediation Hearing reset for 2/25/2008 at 10:00 AM. (cmf, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 1/22/2008) (Entered: 01/22/2008)
17 STIPULATED Motion to Continue all Deadlines and (Propsoed) Order by Trimbco, Inc. (Wilson, Kurt) (Filed on 2/28/2008) Text modified on 2/28/2008 conforming to posted document caption (bw, COURT STAFF). (Entered: 02/28/2008)
18 CERTIFICATION OF MEDIATION Session by Mediator, Daniel Bowling; Mediation session held 2/25/2008; Case partially settled; Phone discussions expected by 4/25/2008; Mediation process continues. (cmf, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 2/29/2008) (Entered: 02/29/2008)
19 STIPULATION TO CONTINUE ALL DEADLINES; AND ORDER. Signed by Judge Patricia V. Trumbull on February 29, 2008. (pvtlc2, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 2/29/2008) (Entered: 02/29/2008)
20 CLERK'S NOTICE Rescheduling Pretrial Conference set for 1/6/2009 02:00 PM. Jury Trial set for 2/2/2009 09:30 AM. (cm, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 3/24/2008) (Entered: 03/24/2008)
21 NOTICE of unavailability of counsel by Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (Mitchell, Marcia) (Filed on 6/17/2008) Modified on 6/18/2008 (bw, COURT STAFF). (Entered: 06/17/2008)
22 MOTION to Withdraw as Attorney of Record filed by Trimbco, Inc. Motion Hearing set for 8/5/2008 10:00 AM. (bw, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 6/27/2008) (Entered: 06/27/2008)

Case: 5:06-cv-6141 As of: 06/03/2017 10:32 AM PDT 4 of 4

06/27/2008 06/27/2008 07/08/2008 07/22/2008 07/24/2008 07/29/2008 12/21/2008
12/21/2008 02/02/2009 02/03/2009
03/17/2009 03/17/2009 03/30/2009 11/25/2009

23 MEMORANDUM of Points and Authorities in Support of Motion to Withdraw as Attorney of Record re 22 filed by Trimbco, Inc. (bw, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 6/27/2008) (Entered: 06/27/2008)
24 Declaration of Caitlin E. Kaufman in Support of MOTION to Withdraw as Attorney of Record 22 filed by Trimbco, Inc. (bw, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 6/27/2008) (Entered: 06/27/2008)
25 Supplemental Declaration of Caitlin E. Kaufman in Support of MOTION to Withdraw as Attorney of Record 22 filed by Trimbco, Inc. (Wilson, Kurt) (Filed on 7/8/2008) Text modified on 7/8/2008 (bw, COURT STAFF). (Entered: 07/08/2008)
26 Statement of No−Opposition to Motion to Withdraw as Attorney of Record re 22 filed by Trimbco, Inc. (Wilson, Kurt) (Filed on 7/22/2008) Text modified on 7/22/2008 conforming to posted document caption (bw, COURT STAFF). (Entered: 07/22/2008)
27 ORDER GRANTING MOTION TO WITHDRAW AS ATTORNEY OF RECORD; ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE by Judge Patricia V. Trumbull granting 22 Motion to Withdraw as Attorney. Attorney Caitlin Elizabeth Kaufman and Roger Mark Mason terminated (pvtlc2, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 7/24/2008) (Entered: 07/24/2008)
28 NOTICE of Entry of Order Granting Motion to Withdraw as Attorney of Record; Order to Show Cause re ( 27 ) by Trimbco, Inc. (Wilson, Kurt) (Filed on 7/29/2008) Text modified on 7/30/2008 conforming to posted document caption (bw, COURT STAFF). (Entered: 07/29/2008)
29 MOTION for Default Judgment as to Defendant Trimbco, Inc. filed by Equal Employment Opportunity Commission. Motion Hearing set for 2/3/2009 10:00 AM in Courtroom #4, 5th Floor, San Jose. (Attachments: # 1 Memorandum in Support of Motion for Default Judgment, # 2 Declaration of Marcia L. Mitchell, # 3 Declaration of Melinda Safford, # 4 Declaration of Debra Garza, # 5 Declaration of Leilani Martinez, # 6 Declaration of Anna McAllister, # 7 Declaration of Laura Jennings, # 8 Declaration of Liliana Aranda, # 9 (Proposed) Order (Mitchell, Marcia) (Filed on 12/21/2008) Modified on 12/22/2008 (bw, COURT STAFF). (Entered: 12/21/2008)
30 Declaration of Marcia L. Mitchell in Support of MOTION for Default Judgment re 29 filed by Equal Employment Opportunity Commission. (Mitchell, Marcia) (Filed on 12/21/2008) Text modified on 12/22/2008 conforming to posted document caption (bw, COURT STAFF). (Entered: 12/21/2008)
31 CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE re 30 Declaration in Support, 29 MOTION for Default Judgment as to Defendant Trimbco, Inc. by Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (Mitchell, Marcia) (Filed on 2/2/2009) Text modified on 2/3/2009 (bw, COURT STAFF). (Entered: 02/02/2009)
32 Minute Entry: Motion Hearing held on 2/3/2009 is granted before Magistrate Patricia V. Trumbull (Date Filed: 2/3/2009) re 29 MOTION for Default Judgment as to Defendant Trimbco, Inc. filed by Equal Employment Opportunity Commission. (Court Reporter Lee−Anne Shortridge.) (cm, COURT STAFF) (Date Filed: 2/3/2009) (Entered: 02/03/2009)
33 ORDER GRANTING PLAINTIFF EEOC'S MOTION FOR DEFAULT JUDGMENT by Judge Patricia V. Trumbull granting 29 Motion for Default Judgment (pvtlc2, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 3/17/2009) (Entered: 03/17/2009)
34 JUDGMENT. Signed by Judge Patricia V. Trumbull on March 17, 2009. (pvtlc2, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 3/17/2009) (Entered: 03/17/2009)
35 Declaration OF SERVICE re 33 Order on Motion for Default Judgment, 34 Judgment by Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (Mitchell, Marcia) (Filed on 3/30/2009) Modified on 4/2/2009 (bw, COURT STAFF). (Entered: 03/30/2009)
FILE located at Federal Records Center (FRC), San Bruno, CA: Accession No: 021−2009−5152, Box No: 103. (mpb, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 11/25/2009) (Entered: 11/25/2009)


[CONTENT] September 2006 | the San Francisco District Office | EEOC | Trimbco | Sharp | the U.S. District Court | the Northern District | California | Hispanic | Title VII of the Civil Rights Act | 1964 |||  |||  ||| June 24, 2008 ||| EEOC | March 17, 2009 ||| 50,000 | six |||  |||  [SUMMARY] In September 2006, the San Francisco District Office of the EEOC filed this lawsuit against Trimbco, doing business as Sharp Precision Manufacturing, in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California, alleging discrimination on the basis of gender (female) and national origin (Hispanic) in violation of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. Specifically, the complaint alleged that the defendant subjected the complaining party, and similarly situated employees, to a hostile work environment based upon gender and national origin.

An unknown portion of the allegations were settled through mediation. On June 24, 2008, the defendant's counsel withdrew, and the defendants did not notify the court of its new counsel. The EEOC moved for a default judgment, which was granted and entered on March 17, 2009. The judgment required the defendant to pay $50,000 in compensatory and punitive damages to six claimants. Additionally, the judgment enjoined the defendants from further engaging in discrimination on the basis of sex or national origin, required the defendants to institute policies and programs to ensure equal opportunities for employees. The case is now closed.  
