8 Fair empl.prac.cas. 56, 7 Empl. Prac. Dec. P 9417 Dave Van Hoomissen, Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, Plaintiff-Intervenor-Appellant v. Xerox Corporation

497 F.2d 180 8 Fair Empl.Prac.Cas. 56 , 7 Empl. Prac. Dec. P 9417 Dave VAN HOOMISSEN, Plaintiff, Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, Plaintiff-Intervenor-Appellant, v. XEROX CORPORATION et al., Defendants-Appellees. No. 74-1037. United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit. May 29, 1974. Carlos G. Ynostroza, San Francisco, Cal., for EEOC. John E. Thorne, of Thorne, Clopton, Herz, Stanek, Inc., San Jose, Cal., Beatrice Rosenberg, Charles L. Reischel, James P. Scanlan, of EEOC, Washington, D.C., for plaintiff. Richard Haas, of Brobeck, Phleger & Harrison, San Francisco, Cal., for defendants-appellees. OPINION Before DUNIWAY, WRIGHT and CHOY, Circuit Judges. EUGENE A. WRIGHT, Circuit Judge: 1 Van Hoomissen sued Xerox, his former employer, under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 (42 U.S.C. 2000e-2(a)), alleging that Xerox fired him and engaged in other acts of retaliation because of his efforts to recruit minorities. 1 The Equal Employment Opportunity Commission sought leave to intervene under 42 U.S.C. 2000e-5(f)(1) and Fed.R.Civ.Proc. 24(b). In its proposed complaint in intervention, EEOC alleged that Xerox both engaged in discriminatory hiring practices and had…