Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission v. Wirelesscomm Inc

May 15, 2012

U.S. EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY COMMISSION, PLAINTIFF,
v.
WIRELESSCOMM INC.,
DEFENDANT.



United States District Court For the Northern District of California

ORDER GRANTING MOTION TO INTERVENE (Re: Docket No. 11)

Pending before the court is Deisy Mora's ("Mora") motion to intervene. Plaintiff U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission ("EEOC") does not oppose this motion. Defendant 19 WirelessComm Inc. ("WirelessComm") does not oppose Mora's right to intervene. 20 WirelessComm, however, opposes Mora's motion on the grounds that the Proposed Complaint in 21

Intervention expands the scope of the EEOC action to include two new defendants and four new 22 causes of action. For the reasons discussed below, the motion is GRANTED. 23

I.BACKGROUND

On or about March 18, 2008, Mora filed charges with the California Department of Fair Employment and Housing ("DFEH") alleging sexual discrimination and harassment. See Proposed 26

Compl. in Intervention ¶ 13, Docket No. 11-3. On March 19, 2008, the DFEH issued Mora a right-27 to-sue notice, closed its case, and deferred its investigation to the EEOC. See id. On March 25, 28 2008, these same charges were filed with the EEOC. See id. On February 23, 2010, the EEOC issued a letter finding reasonable cause that Mora was subjected to a hostile work environment and 2 discriminated based on her sex, and that WirelessCom was aware of the harassment and failed to 3 correct or prevent the harassment. See id. ¶ 14. On September 28, 2011, the EEOC concluded its 4 investigation and filed the instant action alleging unlawful employment practices by 5

On December 2, 2011, Mora filed this Motion to Intervene as Plaintiff in the EEOC's 7 action to assert Title VII claims as well as state law claims for (1) sexual harassment, Cal. Gov. 8 WirelessComm in violation of 42 U.S.C. §§ 2000e--2(a)(1) ("Title VII"). See id. ¶ 15. 6

Code § 12940(k); (2) failure to prevent sexual harassment, Cal. Gov. Code § 12940(k); (3) 9 intentional infliction of emotional distress; and (4) negligent infliction of emotional distress. See id. 10

("Hadid"). See id.

Mora also seeks to add two individual defendants, Lahouari Aribi ("Aribi") and Karim Hadid 14 allows intervention upon timely application "when a statute of the United States confers an 15 unconditional right to intervene." 42 U.S.C. § 2000e-5(f)(1) states in relevant part that "the person 16 or persons aggrieved shall have the right to intervene in a civil action brought by the [EEOC] . . . ." 17

The motion to intervene to assert state law claims, on the other hand, is governed by Fed. R. Civ. P. 24(b), permitting intervention when "an applicant's claim or defense and the main action 20 have a question of law or fact in common." 21 24 federal law suit brought against defendant by the EEOC. 42 U.S.C. § 2000e--5(f)(1) ("The person 25 or person aggrieved shall have the right to intervene in a civil action brought by the Commission . . 26

Fed.R.Civ.P. 24(a) allows intervention upon timely application "when a statute of the United States 28 confers an unconditional right to intervene." The Motion to Intervene was filed roughly two

II.LEGAL STANDARDS

Mora move to intervene in the federal claims pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 24(a), which 42 ...


Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.