IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS EASTERN DIVISION ) ) ) Plaintiff, ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) NATURE OF THE ACTION

Similar documents
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF SOUTH DAKOTA SOUTHERN DIVISION

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF NORTH CAROLINA STATESVILLE DIVISION ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) NATURE OF THE ACTION

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT. FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS eu,:".' IJ~:'LD~~?~:~~URT EASTERN DIVISION ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) )

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA PENSACOLA DIVISION NATURE OF THE ACTION

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COUR~A I FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINO~ STRA~ E EASTERN DIVISION 0~U ) ) tl0v 1 0 7_604 ) ) NATURE OF THE ACTION

NATURE OF THE ACTION. This is an action under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, as amended by the

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT ~,~,~,,.c~...,... ~~"~ ~ " FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF NORTH CAROLI~ SEP -9 ;i ~ [~: 0~ CBA~OTTE OIVlSlON

Case 4:07-cv JLH Document 1 Filed 06/29/2007 ( Page 1 of 6

Case 3:04-cv RLA Document 1-1 Filed 09/30/2004 Page 1 of 6 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF PUERTO RICO

)

Case 3:04-cv JSW Document 168 Filed 10/20/2005 Page 1 of 5 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF WISCONSIN

Case 3:11-cv CRW-TJS Document 1 Filed 04/06/11 Page 1 of 7

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF HAWAII CV

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS HOUSTON DIVISION ORIGINAL COMPLAINT

Case 1:18-cv RDB Document 1 Filed 07/30/18 Page 1 of 6 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF MARYLAND BALTIMORE DIVISION

Case 2:09-cv BSJ-RLE Document 67 Filed 10/28/11 Page 1 of 6

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF WISCONSIN ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) NATURE OF THE ACTION

Case 3:06-cv JAP-TJB Document 1 Filed 03/27/2006 Page 1 of 5 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF NEW JERSEY

-CIVIL RIGHTS EMPLOYMENT

Case 4:17-cv Document 1 Filed in TXSD on 07/20/17 Page 1 of 8

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF NORTH CAROLINA CHARLOTTE DIVISION ) ) ) NATURE OF THE ACTION

) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) )

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS

Case 4:04-cv LLP Document 1 Filed 12/28/2004 Page 1 of 7 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF SOUTH DAKOTA.

Case: 1:10-cv Document #: 1-2 Filed: 06/03/09 Page 1 of 5 PageID #:2

) I ClV a S - BUN. 18 This is an action under Title VII ofthe Civil Rights Act of 1964 and Title I of the Civil

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF IOWA DAVENPORT DIVISION. Nature Of The Action

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF NORTH DAKOTA ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) NATURE OF THE ACTION

Case 4:16-cv Document 1 Filed in TXSD on 09/29/16 Page 1 of 7

Case 2:14-cv MPK Document 1 Filed 04/22/14 Page 1 of 6

Case 1:11-cv LG-JCG Document 2 Filed 11/17/11 Page 1 of 7

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF ARIZONA NATURE OF THE ACTION

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF MINNESOTA ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) NATURE OF THE ACTION

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

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

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN SOUTHERN DIVISION

This is an action under the Genetic Information Nondiscrimination Act of 2008

5:06cv1684 JUDGE HICKS MAG. JUDGE HORNSBY

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF NEBRASKA. Plaintiff, Defendant. AMENDED COMPLAINT AND JURY TRIAL DEMAND NATURE OF ACTION

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) NATURE OF THE ACTION

)

Case 1:17-cv Document 1 Filed 09/27/17 Page 1 of 13 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF HA WAIl. Case No.: NATURE OF THE ACTION AND JURISDICTION

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF GEORGIA DUBLIN DIVISION

Case 2:05-cv JES-SPC Document 47 Filed 04/24/2006 Page 1 of 11

COMPLAINT (Jury Trial Demand)

Case 4:05-cv CLS Document 1 Filed 05/26/2005 Page 1 of 6

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF FLORIDA ORLANDO DIVISION

Case 7:17-cv KMK Document 1 Filed 07/06/17 Page 1 of 11 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK

ORIGINAL COMPLAINT OF THE UNITED STATES EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY COMMISSION TO THE HONORABLE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT:

IN TI-[E UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLORADO. ..-ECHOSTAR COMMUNICATIONS CORPORATION n/k/a DISH, LTD.,

Case 1:06-cv LTB-CBS Document 1 Filed 09/29/2006 Page 1 of 6 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLORADO

Case 9:06-cv RHC Document 1 Filed 02/28/2006 Page 1 of 7

FILED. , #, Case 5:05-cv WRF Document 29 Filed 06/06/2006Page 1 of 9 JUN COMMISSION, Plaintiff, ALICIA MANSEL, Civil Action No.

Case 2:17-cv GMS Document 8 Filed 09/20/17 Page 1 of 3

Case 2:16-cv RSL Document 1 Filed 08/05/16 Page 1 of 13

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA FORT PIERCE DIVISION

Case: 1:06-cv JRA Doc #: 28 Filed: 05/08/09 1 of 9. PageID #: 220

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF HAWAII ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) )

Case 6:10-cv TC Document 1 Filed 09/24/10 Page 1 of 7 Page ID#: 1 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF OREGON

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF SOUTH DAKOTA SOUTHERN DIVISION. Plaintitl, Defendants. COMPLAINT AND JURY TRIAL DEMAND

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

Case 1:13-cv Document 1 Filed 06/28/13 Page 1 of 10 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF NEW HAMPSHIRE

Case: 1:01-cv Document #: 1 Filed: 12/14/01 Page 1 of 7 PageID #:1

Equal Employment Opportunity Commission v. Bob Watson Chevrolet

Case 8:04-cv SCB-TBM Document 32 Filed 10/07/2005 Page 1 of 6

2:04-cv HAB-DGB # 1 Page 1 of 6 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE CENTRAL DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS URBANA DIVISION ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) )

Case: 1:13-cv Document #: 1 Filed: 07/25/13 Page 1 of 7 PageID #:1

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF HAWAII


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

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF GEORGIA ATLANTA DIVISION ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES

EEOC v. Ealge Wings Industries, Inc.

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

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF ARIZONA

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

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF SOUTH DAKOTA SOUTHERN DIVISION

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

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF ARIZONA

EEOC v. Bice of Chicago, et al.

Case 3:16-cv L Document 1 Filed 11/01/16 Page 1 of 9 PageID 1

Second Amended Complaint, Gassman v. Frischholtz et al, Docket No. 1:05-cv (Northern District of Illinois 2005)

Case 1:14-cv KMT Document 1 Filed 09/24/14 USDC Colorado Page 1 of 15 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLORADO

Equal Employment Opportunity Commission v. Dutch Farms, Inc.

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF ARIZONA ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) )

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF ARIZONA

PLAINTIFF AVA SMITH- THOMPSON S COMPLAINT AGAINST DEFENDANT SARA LEE CORPORATION

Introduction. Jurisdiction. Parties

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF GEORGIA ROME DIVISION

Case 3:18-cv TBR Document 1 Filed 01/30/18 Page 1 of 8 PageID #: 1 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT WESTERN DISTRICT OF KENTUCKY LOUISVILLE DIVISION

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

Case 1:14-cv KAM-JO Document 8 Filed 07/02/14 Page 1 of 11 PageID #: 36

Case 6:17-cv JA-GJK Document 1 Filed 12/14/17 Page 1 of 7 PageID 1 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT MIDDLE DISTRICT OF FLORIDA ORLANDO DIVISION

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF ARIZONA. No.: TERRI HAYFORD, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated,

Case 1:13-cv LEK-KSC Document 1 Filed 12/18/13 Page 1 of 9 PageID #: 1 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF HAWAII ) ) ) ) )

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

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF GEORGIA ROME DIVISION

Case: 1:17-cv Document #: 1 Filed: 03/09/17 Page 1 of 6 PageID #:1

Transcription:

", u DOCKETED SEP 2 8 21 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE RTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLIIS EASTERN DIVISION,,~_ EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY COMMISSION, v. NIELSEN & BAINBRIDGE, L.L.C. Ole 758 Plaintiff, Defendant. NATURE OF THE ACTION I L:_,j C\J >:1-,~. -: ('.J CIVIL ACTION. JUD GE LEINENWEBE( Jnry Trial Demanded I MAGISTRATE JUDGE KEYS This is an action under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, as amended, 42 U.S.C. 2e et seq. ("Title VII" and Title I ofthe Civil Rights Act of 1991 to correct unlawful employment practices on the basis of race and sex and to provide appropriate relief to Maria Williams and a class of females who were adversely affected by such practices. Plaintiff, EquaJ Employment Opportunity Commission ("EEOC" alleges that Nielsen & Bainbridge, L.L.C. ("Nielsen & Bainbridge subjected Maria Williams to sexual and racial harassment because of her sex, female and race, African-American. The EEOC also alleges that Nielsen & Bainbridge subjected a class of women to sexual harassment because of their sex (female and a class of women to harassment because of their race (Afiican-American. JURISDICTION AND VENUE 1. Jurisdiction ofthis Court is invoked pursuant to 28 U.S.c. 451,1331,1337, 1343, and 1345. This action is authorized and instituted pursuant to Section 76( (1 and (3 of ( -I

Title VII, 42 U.S.C. 2e-5(t(1 and (3 and 12 of the Civil Rights Act of 1991,42 U.S.C. 1981A. 2. The employment practices hereafter alleged to be unlawful were and are now being committed within the jurisdiction ofthe United States District Court for the Northern District of Illinois, Eastern Division. PARTIES 3. Plaintiff, the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, is an agency of the United States of America charged with the administration, interpretation, and enforcement of Title VII and is expressly authorized to bring this action by Section 76(t(1 and (3 of Title VII, 42 U.S.C. Section 2e-5(t(1 and (3. 4. At all times relevant, Defendant Nielsen & Bainbridge, LLC, a limited liability corporation, registered in the state of Illinois, has continuously been doing business in the Northern District of Illinois and has continuously had at least fifteen employees. 5. At all times relevant, Nielsen & Bainbridge, has continuously been an employer engaged in an industry affecting commerce within the meaning of Sections 71 (b, (g and (h of Title VII, 42 U.S.C. Sections 2e(b, (g and (h. STATEMENT OF CLAIMS 6. More than thirty days prior to the institution ofthis lawsuit, Maria Williams filed a charge with the Commission alleging violations of Title VII by Nielsen & Bainbridge. All conditions precedent to the institution ofthis lawsuit have been fulfilled. -2-

'. v 7. Since at least June 12,2, Defendant Nielsen & Bainbridge has engaged in unlawful employment practices at its Bridgeview, Illinois facility, in violation of Sections 71(k and 73(a of Title VII, 42 U.S.C. Sections 2e(k and 2(a. Such unlawful employment practices have included: I subjecting Maria Williams to harassment because of her sex (female and race (African-American, subjecting a class of women employees to sexual harassment, and 3 subjecting a class of African-American women to harassment because of their race. 8. The effect of the practices complained of above has been to deprive Williams, and classes of women employees adversely affected by the harassment, of equal employment opportunities and otherwise adversely affect their status as employees because of their sex (female and race (African-American. 9. The unlawful employment practices complained of in paragraphs 7 and 8 above were intentional. 1. The unlawful employment practices complained of in paragraphs 7 and 8 above were done with malice or with reckless indifference to the federally protected rights of Williams and classes of women employees because of their sex (female and race (African-American. PRAYER FOR RELIEF WHEREFORE, the Commission respectfully requests that this Court: A. Grant a permanent injunction enjoining Defendant Nielsen & Bainbridge, LLC, its officers, successors, assigns, and all persons in active concert or participation with it, from engaging in any employment practice which discriminates because ofrace and sex. B. Order Defendant to institute and carry out policies, practices and programs which eradicate the effects of its past and present unlawful practices. -3-

u u C. Order Defendant to make whole Williams and the affected classes by providing appropriate back pay with prejudgment interest, in amounts to be determined at trial, and other affirmative relief necessary to eradicate the effects of its unlawful employment practices. D. Order Defendant to make whole Williams and the affected classes, by providing compensation for past and future pecuniary losses resulting from the unlawful employment practices described in paragraphs 7 and 8 above, including medical expenses, in amounts to be determined at trial. E. Order Defendant to make whole Williams and the affected classes by providing compensation for past and future non-pecuniary losses resulting from the unlawful practices complained of in paragraphs 7 and 8 above, including emotional pain, inconvenience, and humiliation, in amounts to be determined at trial. F. Order Defendant to pay Williams and the affected classes punitive damages for its malicious and reckless conduct described in paragraphs 7 and 8 above, in amounts to be determined at trial. G. Grant such further relief as the Court deems necessary and proper in the public interest; and H. Award the Commission its costs in this action. -4-

\.J JURY TRIAL DEMAND The Commission requests ajury trial on all questions of fact raised by its complaint. Respectfully submitted, NICHOLAS M. INZEO Acting Deputy General Counsel GWENDOLYN YOUNG REAMS Associate General Counsel lljit.nu1ly------- Noelle C. Brennan Supervisory Trial Attorney ~r-.d:tk Pamela S. Moore-Gi bs Trial Attorney EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY COMMISSION Chicago District Office 5 West Madison Street Suite 28 Chicago, Illinois 6661 (312 886-912 -5-

Civil Cover Sheet v http://www.ilnd.uscourts.gov/publ! C/F orms/auto js44.cfrr UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT RTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLIIS SEP 2 8 21 Civil Cover Sheet U This automated JS-44 conforms generally to the manual JS-44 approved by the Judicial Conference of the United States in September 1974. The data is required for the use of the Clerk of Court for the purpose of initiating the civil docket sheet. The information contained herein neither replaces nor supplements the filing and service of pleadings or other papers as required by law. This form is authorized for use only in the Northern District oflllinois. Plaintiff(s: EQUAL EMPLOYMENT Defendant(s:NIELSEN & BAINBRIDGE, OPPORTUNITY COMMISSION L.L.c. County of Residence: County of Residence: Plaintiffs Atty: Pamela S. Moore-Gibbs Defendant's Atty: Edward C. Jepson, Jr. Vedder Price Kaufman Kammholz Equal Employment Opportunity Commission 5 W. Madison, Suite 28 Chicago, IL 6661 312-886-912 222 N. LaSalIe Street Chicago, IL 661-13 II. Basis of Jurisdiction: 1. U.S. Gov't Plaintiff III. Citizenship of Principle Parties (Diversity Cases Only Plaintiff:- NI A Defendant:-N/A IV. Origin: 1. Original Proceeding JUDGE LEINENWEBER MAGISTF?ATE JUDGE KEYS V. Nature of Suit: 442 Employment Vr.Cause of Action: Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of1964, as amended, 42 U.S.C. 2e et seq. ("Title Villi and Title I of the Civil Rights Act of 1991 to correct unlawful employment practicies on the basis of race and sex. VII. Requested in Complaint Class Action: DolIar Demand: Jury Demand: Yes '-< '.'. J -" J VIII. This case IS T a refiling of a previously dismissed case. Signature: ~da. laftmv-j~ ;_.. -. ",:' (j ::" Date: If any o~ ~~~s ~corrcct, please go back to the Civil Cover Shcctlnput form using the Back button in your browser and change It. Once correct, print this form, sign and date it and submit it with your new civil action. Note: You may need to adjust the font size in your browser display to make the form print properly. Revised: 61281 I of I Of" 2 If'I 1 11l,f\.(" ",,,,,,

.;,:>~,.;,!;;,>,," ~.~.._--.---~. -: In the Matter of o U UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT RTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLIIS Eastern Division (.'\ Ti (C; \:.W "..,S V:' Case Number: DOCKH~C SEP 2 8 21 APPEARANCES ARE HEREBY FILED BY THE UNDERSIGNED AS ATToRNE-MM'}161U,zATE JUDGE KEYS... '. r~'t~. iqi~f..'t~.. ~a.r..'~~i:ssiom'i';'i'i"h""i'piiyq"'ihh;"'h'..."...""... "...",,... tt$."i:i.~.iii~dx.r;ie'~15.'et>'yi\1.ii.iidilh.f!m'q~ u,"',""-',;xw!s"~"::"i{,,,!,",',~'''',~!!o..,''',',,,,!,~!''!,'',!',l,!,;o;,1"",\bf,1"""""",! """""'!''''"'''''''' '''''",4'''''''d,hL,11,''''',''.,', ",,':..."."""",!" w.'''. 'j" ~ "." <"'''''''';'''","~''''8:~~'W;''k'''''kRH!i:u1Kii&i>ls:;,i;;?it",illtf;f;! ( (A SfZJ~E K. h L7b.i~ &'U~ S1G~'Tt '. J JJ. P~:nela S. Moore-a'bbs FIRM Equal Employment Opportunity Commission STREET ADDRESS NAME (B (,(\/ ~lla' J Noelle C. Brennan PIRM Equal Employment Opportunity Commission STREET ADDRESS 5 W. Madison Suite 28 5 W. Madison Suite 28 cith~tatelz1p C lcago, IL 6661 (3Ll2N8'g6~9Et2 IDENTII'!CATION NUMBER (SEE ITEM 4 ON REVERSE CITYISTATE/ZlP Chicago, IL 6661 (312n53~7582 IDENTIFICA non NUMBER (SEE ITEM 4 ON REVERSE ARDC.619771 ARDC No. 622891 MEMBER OF TRIAL DAR? YES MEMBER OF TRIAL DAR? YES TRIAL A TIORNEY? YES TRIAL ATIORNEY? YES El /'A~/ DESIGNATED AS LOCAL COUNSEL? YES D ---;, // j/ /~ / ji2j III j (D ~ rdft!// ~11/f11f/1 ;dhn C. H FIRM ricksb( L Equal E nployment OIJportunity Commission STREET ADDR lss 5 W / \1adison, Suite 28 SIGNATURE NAME FIRM STREET ADDRESS '>,.Co <oj"" /r i,,,,:.,.....,...:.j!"_...., r,," 1'.;' h.,.. ;.. :..\.3 ;::::; CITY~E/ZIP CITY/STATE/ZIP.,,~ ',;;':~;; Thicago, IL 6661,- '.... TELEPHONE NUMBER (312 353-8551 TELEPHONE NUMBER IDENT[FICA non NUMBER (SEE ITEM 4 ON REVERSE IDENTIFICATION NUMBER (SEE ITEM 4 ON REVERSE C m."; ARDC No. 1187589 MEMBER OF TRIAL BAR? YES MEMBER OF TRIAL BAR'! YES TRIAL A TIORNEY? YES TRIAL A TIORNEY? YES O DESIGNATED AS LOCAL COUNSEL? YES DESIGNATED AS LOCAL COUNSEL? YES "~'"'' _'~l "..' ' I