)

Similar documents
EEOC v. Altec Industries

)

EEOC v. Fleming, Inc., d/b/a J. Edward's

Case 5:11-cv F Document 13 Filed 01/24/12 Page 1 of 9

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF NORTH CAROLINA ASHEVILLE DIVISION

Equal Employment Opportunity Commission v. The Gehl Corporation d/b/a The Gehl Group

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF NORTH CAROLINA WESTERN DIVISION CIVIL ACTION NO: 5:12-CV-818

Equal Employment Opportunity Commission v. Maharaja Hospitality Inc, d/b/a Quality Inn by Choice Hotels

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT. FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLIll~ STATES DISTRICT COURT WESTERN DIVISION CONSENT DECREE THE LITIGATION

EEOC v. Hiten Hospitality L.L.C. d/b/a Family Motor Inn and Jay Kishan Hospitality, Inc. and Mike Patel

EEOC and David Marcotte and Robert Kerouac v. Federal Express Corp.

EEOC v. RSG Forest Products Inc. dba Estacada Lumber Co.

IllY _ UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT WESTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON AT SEATTLE EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY ) CIVIL NO. COO-16S1 Z 10 COJ\.

EEOC v. Northwest Savings Bank

EEOC v. Consolidated Stores, Inc. d/b/a Big Lots

Case 5:07-cv VAP-JCR Document 11 Filed 06/14/2008 Page 1 of 9 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA EASTERN DIVISION

EEOC v. Bice of Chicago, et al.

EEOC v. Mason County Forest Products, LLC

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF MISSOURI WESTERN DIVISION. Plaintiff, CV-W-2-ECF

EEOC and Maria Torres v. The Restaurant Company dba Perkins

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA ~ ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) THE LmGATION

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF DELAWARE ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) CONSENT DECREE

EEOC v. Pacific Airport Services, Inc.,

EEOC v. Original Hot Dog Shops, Inc. doing business as Original Hot Dog Shop, Food Gallery Original, Inc. doing business as Original Hot Dog Shop

Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, Plaintiff, v. Mint Julep Restaurant Operations, LLC d/b/a Cheddar's Casual Cafe, Defendant.

EEOC v. Oglethorpe University

EEOC v. NEA-Alaska, Inc.

EEOC v. River View Coal, LLC

EEOC v. U-Haul International Inc.

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS EASTERN DIVISION

EEOC v. Jolet II, Inc., d/b/a Thompson Care Center

Equal Employment Opportunity Commission v. Bob Watson Chevrolet

United States Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, Plaintiff, v. Jetson Midwest Mailers, Inc., Defendant.

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) CONSENT DECREE

Case 2:03-cv BBD-sta Document 14 Filed 08/05/2004 Page 1 of 7

UNITED STA1ES DISTRICT COURT EAS1ERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK. Civil Action No. 06 CV 2697 (ARR)(RER) CONSENT DECREE

Equal Employment Opportunity Commission et al. v. Majesty Maintenance, Inc.

EEOC v. Tropiano Transportation Services, Inc.

Case 1:16-cv CCB Document 98 Filed 06/28/16 06/23/16 Page 1 of 14 11

EEOC v. Applegate Holdings LLC

Case 2:01-cv DLG Document 30 Entered on FLSD Docket 11/08/2002 Page 1 of 10

Case 3:06-cv JMM Document 140 Filed 06/12/09 Page 1 of 14

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT ~~"A"!tOl'T~'CTCOURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF NEW MEX~eRQUE, New MI!XICO ORDER FOR DISMISSAL WITH PREJUDICE

Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, Plaintiff, v. Studley Products, Inc. and Wildwood Industries, Inc., Defendants.

EEOC & Suzanne Whitty v. Mount Carmel, LLC, and Benedictine Health System, et al.

EEOC v. Merrill Pine Ridge, LLC

Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, Sherree Salter, et al., v. The Shoe Show of Rocky Mount, Inc., Andre Jones

EEOC v. Ealge Wings Industries, Inc.

~. OC' UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT,C:;'IWELl.. cleiwestern DISTRICT OF LOmSIANA

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT MIDDLE DISTRICT OF FLORIDA ORLANDO DIVISION SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT

EEOC v. John Wieland Homes and Neighborhoods, Inc.

EEOC v. Family Dollar Stores of Arkansas

EEOC & Wolansky v. United Healthcare of Florida, Inc.

EEOC v. Hannon's Food Services of Jackson Inc (d/b/a Kentucky Fried Chicken)

EEOC v. Dillard's, Inc

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF MISSOURI EASTERN DMSION CONSENT DECREE

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF NORTH DAKOTA ) ) ) ) INTRODUCTION

EEOC v. Supervalu Holdings, Inc.

THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS. Plaintiff, Defendant. CONSENT DECREE

Equal Employment Opportunity Commission v. Dutch Farms, Inc.

U.S. EEOC v Promens USA, Inc. and Bonar Plastics, Inc.

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA CIVIL ACTION NO Defendant. SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT INTRODUCTION

EEOC v. Moka Shoe Corporation

EEOC v. Pass and Seymour, Inc. and Kennmark Group, Ltd. (Consent Decree as to Pass and Seymour)

EEOC v. JEC Enterprises, Inc., d/b/a McDonalds

EEOC v. Lawry's Retaurants, Inc,, d/b/a Lawry's The Prime Rib, Five Crowns, and Tam O'Shanter Inn

EEOC v. Supreme Corporation and Supreme Northwest LLC

EEOC & Aimee Boss and Morgan Hagedon v. Bodega Bars USA, LLC d/b/a Mosaic Restaurant

Case 1:11-cv NLH -AMD Document 61 Filed 01/24/13 Page 1 of 12 PageID #: 211 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF DELAWARE

United States of America v. The City of Belen, New Mexico

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF MINNESOTA. v. CONSENT DECREE INTRODUCTION

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS EASTERN DIVISION SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT

EEOC, Christopher, Bhend, and Chamara v. National Education Association, National Education Association - Alaska

IN TIlE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT, FOR TIlE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS EASTERN DIVISION. Judge Gettleman CONSENT DECREE THE LITIGATION

EEOC v. Baldwin Supply Co.

) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) The United States Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (the "Commission" or

Equal Employment Opportunity Commission v. Japanese Food Solutions Inc., d/b/a Minado Restaurant

Equal Employment Opportunity Commission v. American Airlines, Inc., and Transport Workers Union Local 501

SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT AND RELEASE. into by and between Sandra G. Myrick ("Myrick") and the North Carolina Administrative Office

EEOC v. Mcdonald's Restaurants of California, Inc.

CASE NO. 5:00-CV COMPLAINT IN INTERVENTION ON BEHALF OF JACKQULINE STOKES

EEOC, et al v Lafayette College, et al.,

NO , Chapter 5 TALLAHASSEE, March 13, Human Resources UNLAWFUL HARASSMENT AND UNLAWFUL SEXUAL HARASSMENT

Equal Employment Opportunity Commission et al. v. Harbor Freight Tools USA, Inc., d/b/a Harbor Freight Tools

EEOC v. Alyeska Pipeline Service Co.

Equal Employment Opportunity Commission v. American Seafoods Company

Equal Employment Opportunity Commission v. Betsy Ross Flag Girl, Inc. d/b/a Betsy Ross Flag Girl and Barjac Company

EEOC. v. Fox News. Cornell University ILR School. Judge William H. Pauly

Case 4:11-cv BLW Document 1 Filed 12/15/11 Page 1 of 13

EEOC v. Cleveland Construction, Inc.

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF NEW HAMPSHIR E CONSENT DECREE

EEOC v. Wal-Mart Stores d/b/a Sam s Club

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS HOUSTON DIVISION CONSENT DECREE

Case 2:99-cv JPM Document 14 Filed 11/24/1999 Page 1 of 7 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF TENNESSEE

Cornell University ILR School. Judge Karen E. Schreier

Equal Employment Opportunity Commission v. Revolution Studios and Smile Productions, LLC

PROHIBITION OF HARASSMENT & DISCRIMINATION

CONSENT DECREE;~:~~~~~ s; ~~~: c:? The Equal Employment Opportunity Commission ("Commission" or "EEi:;~ins0\Ited

Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, Plaintiff and Jane Doe, Plaintiff-Intervenor v. Brookshire Grocery Company, Defendant.

EEOC v. CMC Service of Chicago, LLC d/b/a Great Clips for Hair

Transcription:

f'?ecfpj2d ( '"ndi ',.--,.. ~nr\.\.'.',." /" r. -, \, \,. IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT CI / U ' FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF NORTH CAROLINA 211,. S. Dtt. C:>l'rt CHARLOTTE DIVISION l~1 DI"t (,j' " " 'w ""'. ',_, O :' ii'; 0?003 EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY COMMISSION, Plaintiff, and DEBRA A. BENSON, Plaintiff Intervenor, BLUE MAX TRUCKING, INC., Defendant. v. ----------------------,~ I'... r' f' I:.. '" I.',, I I '..,", " ~.,,~ 8 "'1,, 0, i\l-v -, H, I- un I' " l '. ith J ~.,".. '.' r- I'! ~, l",i I,l 1,, li I,I l. CIVIL ACTION NO. 3:02CV273 MU CONSENT DECREE The Equal Employment Opportunity Commission ("EEOC" or "Commission" instituted this action pursuant to Section 706(f(1 and (3 oftitle VII of the Civil Rights Act ofl964, as amended, 42 US.Co Section 2000e-5(f(1 and (3 ("Title VII", and Section 102 of the Civil Rights Act of 1991,42 U.S.C. 1981a. The Commission's Complaint alleges thatdefcndant Blue Max Trucking, Inc. ("Blue Max" discriminated against Debra A. Benson by subjecting her to a sexually hostile work environment. Debra A. Benson intervened in this action, also alleging Defendant Blue Max discriminated against her by subjecting her to a sexually hostile work environment. Intervenor Benson further alleged Defendant Blue Max discriminated against her by SUbjecting her to a racially hostile work environment and by discharging her, The parties hereby stipulate to jurisdiction of the Court over the parties and agree that the subject matter of this action is properly before the Court. The parties have advised this Court that they desire to resolve the allegations in the Complaint without the burden, expense, and delay of further litigation.

It is therefore the finding of this Court, made on the pleadings and the record as a whole, that: (I the Court has jurisdiction over the parties and the subject matter of this action; (2 the purpose and provisions oftitle VII will be promoted and effectuated by the entry of the Consent Decree; and (3 this Decree resolves all matters in controversy between the parties as provided in paragraphs I through 17 below. It is therefore ORDERED, ADWDGED AND DECREED as follows: 1. Defendant shall not discriminate against or harass individuals on the basis of sex or race within the meaning oftitle VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, and specifically shall not subject employees to unlawful sexual harassment or unlawful racial harassment. 2. Defendant shall not discriminate or retaliate against any person because of opposition to any practice made unlawful under Title VII, or because of the filing of a charge, the giving of testimony or assistance, or the participation in any investigation, proceeding or hearing under the foregoing statute. 3. Defendant shall pay Debra A. Benson the sum often Thousand Dollars ($1 0,000.00 in past lost earnings and the sum of Forty-Seven Thousand Five Hundred Dollars ($47,500.00 as personal injury danjages in this action, for a total payment of Fifty-Seven Thousand Five Hundred Dollars ($57,500.00. Defendant shall make payment by issuing the following: (I a check in the amount often Thousand Dollars ($10,000.00 payable to Debra A. Benson; and (2 a check in the amount of Forty-Seven Thousand Five Hundred Dollars ($47,500.00 jointly payable to Debra A. Benson and Tamara W. Brooks, Esq. Payment shall be made within thirty (30 days ofjuly 9, 2003. Defendant shall mail the checks to Tamara W. Brooks, Esq., 222 N. Sharon Amity Road, Charlotte, North Carolina 282 I I. Within ten (10 days after the checks have been sent to Ms. Brooks, Defendant shall mail to Mindy E. Weinstein, Regional Attorney, Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, 129 West Trade Street, Suite 400, Charlotte, NC 28202, a copy of each check and

proof of its delivery to Ms. Brooks. 4. Defendant shall pay the costs ofthe mediation in this case in accordance with the invoice to be provided by the mediator. 5. Defendant agrees to eliminate from the employment records ofdebraa. Benson any and all documents and entries relating to the facts and circumstances which led to the filing of the EEOC charge of discrimination and the related events that occurred thereafter, including the filing of this lawsuit. 6. Defendant agrees to provide Debra A. Benson with a positive letter of reference signed by Defendant's President, a copy of which is attached hereto. In addition, if Defendant receives any inquiries regarding the employment of Ms. Benson, Defendant shall provide a positive reference for Ms. Benson, which shall recite the same information contained in the aforementioned Jetter. 7. Within 90 days of the entry of this decree by the Court, Defendant shall adopt, implement and distribute a formal, written anti-discrimination policy, which shall include an explanation of the requirements ofthe federal equal employment opportunity laws, including Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and its prohibition against sex discrimination and race discrimination in the workplace, including sexual harassment and racial harassment, and a procedure for complaining about discrimination. Defendant shall distribute to each current employee a copy of the policy within the aforementioned 90 day time period. During the term of this Decree, Defendant shall distribute the policy to all new employees at the time of hire. 8. During the teon of this Decree, Defendant shall provide an annual training program on Title VII to all personnel. Said training prograrn shall be a minimum offour (4 hours in length and shall be conducted by an individual who is not an employee ofdefendant or any of its affiliates. If the prograrn is to be conducted by someone other than Defendant's attorney of record herein, then

at least sixty (60 days prior to each program, Defendant shall provide the Commission with the name and qualifications ofthe individual(s who will conduct the training program. At least fifteen (15 days prior to each program, Defendant shall provide the Commission with an agenda for the training program. The individual{s conducting the training and the agenda tor the training will be subject to the Commission's approval. Defendant's attorney of record herein is approved by the Commission as qualified to conduct the aforementioned training programs for Defendant. Each training program shall include an explanation ofthe requirements of the federal equal employment opportunity laws, including Title VII ofthe Civil Rights Actof 1964 and its prohibition against sex discrimination and race discrimination in the workplace, including sexual harassment and racial harassment. Each training program shall also cover Defendant's harassment policy and an explanation of the rights and responsibilities of employees and managers under the policy. 9. The first training program shall be completed within ninety (90 days after entry of the decree by the Court. Each subsequent training program shall be conducted at approximately oneyear intervals. Within ten (\ 0 days after completion of each training program, Defendant shall certify to the Commission the specific training which was undertaken and shall provide the Commission with a roster of all employees in attendance. 10. Defendants agree to include training for all employees on Title VII in new hire orientation and other appropriate forums, including Defendant's obligations under Title VII and employee rights under Title VII. II. During the term of this Decree, Defendant shall conspicuously past the attached Employee Notice, marked Appendix A, hereby made a part ofthis Decree, in each place of business, in a place where it is visible to employees. If the Notice becomes defaced or unreadable, Defendant shall replace it by posting another copy ofthe Notice.

12. Defendant agrees to provide the Commission with semi-annual reports during the tenn of this Decree. The reports shall include the following infonnation: the identities of all of the Defendant's employees who have complained of or reported sexual harassment, including by way of identification each individual's full name, home address, home telephone number, social security number, and gender; a statement ofthe individual's complaint; and a description of what action was taken in response to the individual's complaint. Defendant shall submit the first report to the Commission fout (4 months after the date of entry of this Consent Decree and shall submit subsequent reports every six (6 months thereafter during the tenn of this Decree. 13. Defendant agrees that the Commission may review compliance with this Decree. As part of such review, the Commission, upon five days notice to the Defendant, may inspect the premises, interview employees and examine and copy documents. 14. If at any time during the term of this Decree, the Commission believes that Defendant is in violation ofthis Decree, the Commission shall give written notice of the a\1eged violation to Defendant. Defendant then shall have twenty-one (21 days in which to investigate and respond to the allegations. Thereafter, the parties shall have a period of twenty (20 days, or such additional period as may be agreed upon by them, in which to engage in negotiation and conciliation regarding such allegations, before the Commission exercises any remedy provided by law. 15. Except as otherwise provided herein, each party shall bear its own costs and fees. 16. The tenn of this Decree shall be for thirty (30 months from its entry by the Court. 17. This Court shall retain jurisdiction of this cause for the tenn of this Decree for purposes of monitoring compliance with this Decree and entry of such furiher orders as may be necessary or appropriate. Date ~;gm njtedsilltcsdistrict Judge ~ Westem District of North Carolina

The parties jointly request that the Court approve and enter the Consent Decree: This the.( $ ~ay ofjuly 2003. This the ~day ofjuly 2003. EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY COMMISSION, BLU MAX TRUCKING, INC., Defendant Plaintiff Cfyi. ~ GWENDOLYN YOUNG REAMS Associate General Counsel Regional Attorney ~. Senior Trial Attorney EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY COMMISSION Charlotte District Office 129 West Trade Street, Suite 400 Charlotte, North Carolina 28202 Telephone: 704.344.6885 Faesimile: 704.344.6870 ROBE T C. r5 RTCH, ESfC' (NC B 10857 MICHELLE P. MASSINGALE, ESQ. (NC Bar 29628 SELLERS, HINSHAW, AYERS, DORTCH & LYONS, P.A. Cameron Brown Building 30 I S. McDowell Street, Suite 410 Charlotte, North Carolins 28204 Telephone: 704.377.5050 Facsimile: 704.339.0172 This the _ day of July 2003. DEBRA A. BENSON, Plaintiff Intervenor ~~~~~~~~ coka TAMARA W. BROOK ESQ. (NC Bar 24139 WIDlS & BROOKS, PLLC 222 N. Sharon Amity Road Charlotte, North Carolina 2821 I Telephone: 704.365.0277 Facsimile: 704.365.8734

TO WHOM IT MAY CONCERN: Debra Benson was employed by Blue Max Trucking from October of 1999 to July of 2001. She was employed in the capacity of a dump truck driver. She did not have any accidents on the job while employed, was in compliance with all of the DOT requirements and consistently arrived to work on time. While employed at Blue Max Trucking, Ms. Benson got along with her coworkers and was an asset to the company. Date: 7", ;;;. -03>,JL~~~I'_'-"-''-:--:---f'-7- Denton Williams, Presiden Blue Max Trucking, Inc.

EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY COMMISSION, Plaintiff, IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF NORTH CAROLINA CHARLOTTE DMSION v. BLUE MAX TRUCKING, INC., Defendant. CIVIL ACTION NO. 3:02CV273-MU EMPLOYEE NOTICE ---------------------- I. This Notice is posted pursuant to a settlement between the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission ("EEOC" and Blue Max Trucking, Inc. in a case of discrimination based on gender. Specifically, the EEOC alleged that Blue Max Trucking subjected Debra A. Benson to a sexually hostile work environment, in violation of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, as amended ("Title VII". Blue Max Trucking, Inc. denied all of the EEOC's allegations, and the settlement entered into with the EEOC is not an admission of wrongdoing. 2. Federal law requires that employers not discriminate against any employee or applicant for employment because ofthe individual's race, color, religion, sex, national origin, age (40 or older or disability. Federal law also prohibits retaliation against employees because they have opposed unlawful employment discrimination, participated in employment discrimination proceedings, or otherwise asserted their rights under the laws enforced by the EEOC. 3. In settlement of this lawsuit, Blue Max Trucking, Inc. agreed to do the following: make a payment to Ms. Benson; adopt new formal, written anti harassment/discrimination policies; and provide annual training regarding Blue Max Trucking's obligations under Title VII. 4. Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 is a federal law which prohibits sex discrimination or retaliation against any employee in all aspects of employment including, but not limited to, hiring, promotion, discharge, pay, job training and fringe benefits. Title VII also prohibits sexual harassment. Sexual harassment arises when a workplace is permeated with sexually discriminatory mtimidation, ridicule, and insult that is sufficiently severe or pervasive to alter the conditions of the victim's employment and create an abusive working environment. Sexual harassment may include, but is not limited to, sexual comments, jokes or gestures, requests for sexual favors, inappropriate touching, or sexual advances. 5. Blue Max Trucking, Inc. supports and will comply with such federal law in all respects. Specifically, BIue Max Tmcking, Inc. confirms its policy of not subjecting employees to sexual harassment or a sexually hostile work environment. Blue Max Trucking also confirms its policy that it will no! take any actions against employees because they have exercised their rights, reported an alleged violation under the law or given testimony, assistance or participation in any investigation, proceeding or hearing conducted by the EEOC. An employee has the right, and is encouraged to exercise that right, to report allegations of employment discrimination in the workplace. An employee may contact their local U. S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission field office for the purpose of filing a charge of employment discrimination. To locate the nearest field office, contact: Equal Employment OpportunIty Commission 1801 LStreet,N.W. Washington, DC 20507 TEL: 1 800 669 4000

--_..._... United States District court for the Western District of North Carolina August 14, 2003 rib * * MAILING CERTIFICATE OF CLERK * * Re; 3;02-cv-00273 True and correct copies of the attached were mailed by the clerk to the following; Gwendolyn Young Reams, Esq. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission 1801 L Street, N.W. 7th Floor Washington, DC 20507 Kara Gibbon Haden, Esq. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission Charlotte Dtstrict Office 129 West Trade street Suite 400 Charlotte, NC 28202 Bobby C. Simpson, Esq. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission 129 W. Trade St. Suite 400 Charlotte, NC 28202-2799 Robert C. Dortch Jr., Esq. Sellers, Hinshaw, Ayers, Dortch & Lyons, P.A. 301 So. McDowell St. Suite 410 Cameron-Brown Bldg. Charlotte, NC 28204-2686 Michelle Price Massingale, Esq. Sellers, Hinshaw, Ayers, Dortch & Lyons, P.A. 301 So. McDowell St. Suite 410 Cameron-Brown Bldg. Charlotte, NC 28204-2686 Tamara W. Brooks, Esq. Widis & Brooks 222 N. Sharon Amity Road CHarlotte, NC 28211

ee: Judge Magistrate Judge U.S. Marshal Probation U.S. Attorney Atty. for Deft. Defendant Warden Bureau of Prisons Court Reporter Courtroom Deputy Orig-Seeurity Bankruptcy Clerk's Ofe. Other /;7 rk ~... 'I\~, I D puty cl~ k Frank ~.. ~Ohl(~. Cle::t By:" \ ~J? ej,{.0~ ( /