Fbop Co Employment Law and Info Quarterly Litigation Stats 1991
Download original document:
This text is machine-read, and may contain errors. Check the original document to verify accuracy.
" EMPLOYMENT LAW AND INFORMATION QUARTERLY LITIGATION STATISTICS October 1, 1991 LOC NUM HC FTC BIV 1 0 0 0 OTH - December 31, 1991 ANS PEN CLD lilT 0 3 0 0 SET AWD MXR NER SER NCR SCR WXR CO TOT *Title VII 1* 0 0 NARRATIVE ~otts (update) v. Bureau of Pri s ons, c ivil Action No. 8 8-2824 On october 7 , 1991, the Judge d enied plaintiff's motion to alter or amend the order entered on September 18, 1991. On October 25, 1991, a ttorney Janet Rose Cooper filed her appearance on behalf of plaintiff. porothy D. Miller v. Di c k Thornburgh, Ci v il Action No. 90- 30050 / RV Defendant filed a motion f or relief from the Judge's order granting defendant's motion to dismiss on August 5, 1991. The Judge granted plaintiff's motion for rel i ef, vacated his order of dismissal, and reacti v ated the case on September 1 2, 1991. On October 8 , 1991, defendant filed an answer to the complaint and served plaintiff with defendant's first request for the production of documents and defendant's first set of interrogatories. On october 13, 1991, the Judge e ntered a scheduling order directing that discovery be completed no later than February 17, 1992. On October 13, 1991, defendant served plaintiff with a notice of deposition. Defendant deposed plaintiff on December 2, 1991. On December 5 , 1991, plaintiff filed a motion for extension of the discovery process, and a motion for extension until January 2, 1992 to respond to defendant's first set of i nterrogatories a nd defendant ' s first request for the production of documents. On December 13, 1991, plaintiff served defendant with plaintiff's first request for the producti on of documents and plaintiff's first and second set of interrogatories. Plaintiff s erved defendant with plaintiff's third set of interrogatories , and with plaintiff's responses to defendant's first set of i nterrogatories and defendant's first request for the production of documents on December 16, 1991. On December 18, 1991, the Judge entered an order extending the discovery process through April 17, 1992, and granting plaintiff's motion for extension until January 2, 1992 to respond to defendant's first set of interrogatories and defendant's first request for the production of documents. Helen L. Archie v. Pick Thornburgh. Dale Thomas. stanley Wexler. John Flynn. Steve Reayes. Sandra Hurst. and penise Montague, Civil Action No. 91-1585 ~ .,. . On June 27, 1991, through her attorney, Erroll D. Brown, plaintiff, Helen L. Archie, filed this 51-paragraph civil action, alleging that s he was discriminated against because of her race (black), while she worked as a secretary in the corporate Marketing Division at the Federal Prison Industries, Inc., Washington, DC (UNICOR-DC), in that she was denied promotional opportunities and assignments Which similarly situated white employees were given, and that an 2 Administrative Officer position was advertised originally at the GS-9/11/12 level, and was then changed to the GS-11/12 level to prevent her from qualifying. Plaintiff alleges that after she was transferred to the Central Office, Federal Bureau of Prisons, Washington, DC, as a Staffing specialist, she was again discriminated against because of her race (black) and in retaliation for filing an EEO complaint in that she was assigned a greater work load than others in her position and that conditions were placed on her promotion to GS-9, staffing Specialist. The complaint also purports to set forth claims under District of Columbia law for assault, battery, negligent infliction of emotional distress, intentional infliction of emotional distress, and defamation. As a remedy, plaintiff seeks a "transfer out of the department in which she works into a comparable position in another department with the Department of Justice," other unspecified "equitable relief as the court deems just and proper," plus costs and attorney/s fees. Plaintiff served the united States with a copy of the summons and complaint on November 4, 1991. Assistant u.s. Attorney CAUSA) Jeffrey T. Sprung was assigned to the case on December 6, 1991. On December 26, 1991, Associate General Counsel, George E. Pruden, II, provided the AUSA with a Ii tigation report and with copies of relevant documents. On December, 27, 1991, the Defendant was granted an enlargement of time until February 6, 1992. 'V ..i