Herman

Williams v. Herman

Good Law
129 F. Supp. 2d 1281·2001 WL 111050·85 Fair Empl. Prac. Cas. (BNA) 37·2001 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 6217
United States District Court, Eastern District of CaliforniaJanuary 11, 2001CIV.S00693LKKDADCalifornia1,791 words

Opinion

Opinion

Karlton, J.

ORDER

On March 30, 2000, plaintiff brought suit to challenge the remedy she was awarded in a decision of the Equal Opportunity Commission (“EEOC”) that was adopted by defendant on March 2, 2000. Plaintiff seeks to litigate the portion of that decision which relates to damages, without subjecting to de novo review that portion of the decision which found that she was the victim of discrimination.

This matter is now before the court on defendant’s motion for partial summary judgment. The motion seeks a determination that if plaintiff persists in challenging the sufficiency of the remedy she will expose the determination of discrimination to de novo review. I resolve the matter based on the papers and pleadings filed herein and after oral argument.

I.

FACTS

Plaintiff, an African American female, was a GS-5 mine inspection assistant for the Mine Safety and Health Administration at Vacaville. She was denied a promotion to a GS-6 position as a Lead Mine Inspection Assistant in August of 1994. Plaintiff filed an administrative complaint against the Department of Labor based upon discrimination.

On January 27, 2000, the EEOC issued a decision finding that plaintiff was not selected…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.