US Equal Employment Opportunity Commission v. Placer ARC

Good Law
114 F. Supp. 3d 1048·32 Am. Disabilities Cas. (BNA) 239·2015 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 90736
United States District Court, Eastern District of CaliforniaJuly 13, 2015No. 2:13-cv-0577-KJM-EFBCalifornia6,843 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

Mueller, J.

ORDER

This matter is before the court on defendant Placer ARC d/b/a Placer Advocacy Resources and Choices’ (ARC) Motion for Summary Judgment or, in the alternative, Partial Summary Judgment. ’ Def.’s Mot. Summ. J., ECF 67. The U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) opposes the motion. Opp’n, ECF No. 72. The court held á hearing on the matter on January 30, 2015, at which Debra Smith and Ami Sanghvi appeared for plaintiff and Robert Rediger and Candice Rediger appeared for defendant. As explained below, the court GRANTS in part and DENIES in part defendant’s motion.

I. BACKGROUND

A. PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND

On March 25, 2013, the EEOC filed a complaint on behalf of charging party 1 Homeyra - Kazerounian ’ alleging three causes of- action. Compl., ECF 1. The complaint alleges violations of: (1) Title I of 42 U.S.C. 12101 et seq. (the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA)) (disability discrimination); (2) Titles I and V of the ADA (retaliation); and (3) Titles I and V of .the ADA (constructive discharge). Plaintiff seeks (1) ■ injunctive relief; (2) an order defendant “institute and carry out policies, practices, and programs which provide equal employment opportunities…

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.