Case 1:11-cv-00875-RB-CG Document 1 Filed 09/29/11 Page 1 of 20

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF NEW MEXICO

EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY
COMMISSION,

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

Plaintiff,
v.

PITRE INC. d.b.a. PITRE
BUICK/PONTIAC,

Defendant.

CIV NO.:_________________

________________________________________________________________
COMPLAINT AND JURY TRIAL DEMAND
________________________________________________________________
NATURE OF THE ACTION
This is an action under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and Title I of the Civil
Rights Act of 1991 to correct alleged unlawful employment practices on the basis of sex and
engagement in protected activity, and to provide appropriate relief to Charging Parties Richard
Yob and Sasha Dulkerian (referred collectively as “Charging Parties”) and a class of male
employees who were adversely affected by such practices during their employment with
Defendant Pitre Inc. Plaintiff Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (“EEOC” or “the
Commission”) alleges that Charging Parties and a class of men were subjected to a pattern or
practice of sexual harassment while employed at Defendant’s car dealership located in
Albuquerque, New Mexico, including, but not limited to, verbal sexual harassment, including
sexual comments and innuendo, unwelcome and assaultive physical touching, retaliation for

1

 Case 1:11-cv-00875-RB-CG Document 1 Filed 09/29/11 Page 2 of 20

reporting or complaining about the sexual harassment, and an overall work atmosphere which
fostered and condoned sexual harassment, all of which created a hostile work environment
because of sex, male. The Commission also alleges that some of the men, including Charging
Party Richard Yob, were forced to resign their employment due to intolerable working
conditions. Charging Parties and a class of men also reported and objected to the sexual
harassment and were subjected to retaliatory actions, including but not limited to actions that
affected their salary and commission, and termination from their employment with Defendant
because of their engagement in protected activity.
JURISDICTION AND VENUE
1.

Jurisdiction of this Court is invoked pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §§ 451, 1331, 1337,

1343, and 1345. This action is authorized and instituted pursuant to Sections 706(f)(1),
706(f)(3), and 707 of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, as amended, 42 U.S.C. § 2000e-5
(f)(1) and (3), and § 2000e-6 (“Title VII”), and Section 102 of the Civil Rights Act of 1991, 42
U.S.C. § 1981a.
2.

At all relevant times, the employment practices alleged to be unlawful were

committed within the jurisdiction of the United States District Court for the District of New
Mexico.
PARTIES
3.

EEOC is the 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 Sections 706(f)(1), 706(f)(3), and 707 of Title VII, 42 U.S.C. § 2000e-5(f)(1) and
(3), and § 2000e-6.

2

 Case 1:11-cv-00875-RB-CG Document 1 Filed 09/29/11 Page 3 of 20

4.

At all relevant times, Defendant Pitre Inc. has been a New Mexico corporation

continuously doing business in Albuquerque, New Mexico, and has continuously employed at
least 15 employees.
5.

At all relevant times, Defendant has continuously been and is now an employer

engaged in an industry affecting commerce within the meaning of Sections 701(b), (g), and (h)
of Title VII, 42 U.S.C. § 2000e-(b), (g), and (h).
6.

At all relevant times, Defendant Pitre Inc. (“Pitre Albuquerque”) was an

integrated enterprise with Pitre Santa Fe. LLC (“Pitre Santa Fe”), Pitre Chrysler, Plymouth,
Scottsdale, Inc.(“Pitre Scottsdale”), R.G.P. Auto Inc. (“RGP Auto”), and 21 Bell, LLC. (“21
Bell”).
7.

At all relevant times, Pitre Albuquerque employed Charging Parties and the group

of males adversely affected by the alleged unlawful employment practices.
GENERAL ALLEGATIONS
8.

More than thirty days prior to the institution of this lawsuit, Richard Yob (“Yob”)

and Sasha Dulkerian (“Dulkerian”) filed charges with the Commission alleging violations of
Title VII by Defendants.
9.

The Commission provided Defendant with notice of the charges of

discrimination.
10.

The Commission conducted an investigation regarding the allegations made in the

charges of discrimination.
11.

Based on evidence adduced during its investigation, the Commission issued

letters of determination as to both charges of discrimination.

3

 Case 1:11-cv-00875-RB-CG Document 1 Filed 09/29/11 Page 4 of 20

12.

Prior to filing this lawsuit the Commission invited Defendant to engage with

EEOC in informal methods of conference, conciliation, and persuasion, to reach an agreement on
how to eliminate and remedy the alleged unlawful practices.
13.

As part of the conciliation process, the Commission provided Defendant with a

settlement proposal, indicating the kinds of relief the Commission was requesting as part of a
conciliation agreement.
14.

The Commission’s efforts to resolve the case informally in conciliation were

unsuccessful.
15.

The Commission provided Defendant notice that the conciliation efforts had

16.

All conditions precedent to the institution of this lawsuit have been fulfilled.

17.

During the relevant time period, Defendant was one of several related car

failed.

dealerships in Arizona and New Mexico,
a. Robert G. Pitre is the owner of Pitre Albuquerque, Pitre Santa Fe, Pitre
Scottsdale, RGP Auto, and 21 Bell (referred collectively as “Pitre Entities”).
b. Upon information and belief, all five Pitre Entities were all managed by PAM
Management, L.L.C., also owned by Robert G. Pitre.
c. Upon information and belief, all five Pitre Entities bought and sold assets
through Pitre Holdings, also owned by Robert G. Pitre.
d. The five Pitre Entities share some common corporate officers.
18.

The Pitre Entities, together with PAM Management, L.L.C. and Pitre Holdings

constitute an integrated enterprise.

4

 Case 1:11-cv-00875-RB-CG Document 1 Filed 09/29/11 Page 5 of 20

19.

The Pitre Entities collectively employed over 300 employees in their car

dealerships in New Mexico and Arizona.
20.

At all times relevant to this lawsuit, Pitre Albuquerque employed James Gallegos

(“Gallegos”) as a lot attendant.
21.

At all times relevant to this lawsuit, Pitre Albuquerque employed General

Manager Charles Ratliff (“GM Ratliff”) to oversee operations of the Albuquerque dealership.
22.

At all times relevant to this lawsuit, Pitre Albuquerque employed Sales Manager

Chuck Ratliff (“SM Ratliff”), who directly supervised the sales associates at the Albuquerque car
dealership.
23.

At all times relevant to this lawsuit, Pitre Albuquerque employed Randy Powers

as the Service Manager, who directly supervised the service associates at the Albuquerque car
dealership.
24.

At all times relevant to this lawsuit, Tom Stever was employed as the Human

Resources Director and Chief Financial Officer for Pitre Albuquerque.
25.

Beginning in February of 2010, Charging Party Yob was employed by Pitre

Albuquerque as a sales associate.
26.

Throughout his employment at Pitre Albuquerque, Yob was supervised by SM

27.

Beginning in September 2007, Charging Party Dulkerian was employed by Pitre

Ratliff.

Albuquerque as an Assistant Service Manager.
28.

Throughout his employment at Pitre Albuquerque, Dulkerian was supervised by

Randy Powers.

5

 Case 1:11-cv-00875-RB-CG Document 1 Filed 09/29/11 Page 6 of 20

29.

Since at least February 2010, Charging Party Yob was sexually harassed by

Gallegos.
30.

Since the later part of 2007, Charging Party Dulkerian was sexually harassed by

Gallegos.
31.

Since at least 1998 and through at least August 6, 2010, a group of male

employees were sexually harassed by Gallegos.
32.

Examples of the sexually harassing conduct suffered by Charging Parties and a

group of aggrieved male employees include, but are not limited to:
a. Gallegos bit at least one of the Charging Parties and other male employees on
the penis;
b. Frequently, Gallegos grabbed, slapped and/or touched Charging Parties and
other male employees on the buttocks, penis or other parts of their bodies.
c. Frequently Gallegos exposed his penis and bare buttocks to Charging Parties
and other male employees, including but not limited to slapping his penis
against the front storeroom window;
d. Frequently Gallegos solicited Charging Parties and other male employees to
engage in sexual relations and/or sexual acts with Gallegos in exchange for
money;
e. Frequently, Gallegos would kneel in front of a male employee, try to pull the
employee’s pants down, and attempt or pretend to perform oral sex on the
male employee;

6

 Case 1:11-cv-00875-RB-CG Document 1 Filed 09/29/11 Page 7 of 20

f. Frequently, Gallegos attempted and/or pulled down the pants of Charging
Parties and other male employees ;
g. Gallegos made frequent unwelcome sexual comments, sexual jokes, or sexual
innuendo to Charging Parties and other men, including but not limited to,
overtures to have sex with Gallegos;
h. Gallegos wrestled down male employees to touch their private parts or to
force their face into his (Gallegos) crotch area; and
i. Frequently, Gallegos made comments about the penis size and/or buttocks of
several male employees.
33.

Gallegos’ sexual actions and comments occurred at least several times each week,

sometimes several times in a day.
34.

Gallegos’ sexual comments and touching were not invited or welcomed by male

employees at Pitre Albuquerque.
35.

Gallegos’ sexual comments and touching were offensive to male employees at

Pitre Albuquerque.
36.

Gallegos offensive sexual actions and comments were open and notorious in the

workplace.
37.

Gallegos offensive sexual actions and comments were frequently done in the

presence of managers who did nothing to stop the conduct.
38.

The workplace environment at Pitre Albuquerque was permeated with sexually

offensive conduct towards male employees.

7

 Case 1:11-cv-00875-RB-CG Document 1 Filed 09/29/11 Page 8 of 20

39.

Graphic pornography, including but not limited to, homosexual and bestiality

pornography was shown in open work areas and on work computers.
40.

Newly hired employees were subjected to a “car wash initiation” which entailed

forcing the new employee to ride in a locked vehicle through Defendant’s car wash with at least
three employees, including but not limited to Gallegos, while Gallegos exposed his genitals and
attempted to grope and/or touch the new employee in a sexual manner, including groping the
employee’s genitals.
41.

A photograph of a penis, next to the ear of a sleeping male employee was taken at

in the workplace at Pitre Albuquerque, and shown to various male employees.
42.

Other male employees, including Gallegos, exposed their buttocks and penises on

numerous occasions in public work areas.
43.

General Manager Ratliff frequently encouraged and/or requested Gallegos to

subject the Charging Parties and male employees to sexual touching, innuendo and /or
comments.
44.

Gallegos’ inappropriate sexual comments and touching were sufficiently severe

and/or pervasive to alter the working conditions of male employees at Pitre Albuquerque.
45.

Sales and Service Managers working with Gallegos knew, or in the exercise of

reasonable care should have known of the hostile work environment created by Gallegos.
46.

Sales Manager Ratliff knew of the hostile work environment created by Gallegos.

47.

Sales Manager Ratliff received repeated complaints from at least one of the

Charging Parties, and a class of male employees, about the sexual harassment in the workplace.

8

 Case 1:11-cv-00875-RB-CG Document 1 Filed 09/29/11 Page 9 of 20

48.

Sales Manager Ratliff encouraged, condoned, and requested Gallegos to subject

Charging Parties and a class of male employees to sexual harassment.
49.

Service Manager Randy Powers knew of the hostile work environment created by

Gallegos.
50.

Service Manager Randy Powers received repeated complaints from at least one of

the Charging Parties, and a class of male employees, about the sexual harassment in the
workplace.
51.

Service Manager Randy Powers directly observed Gallegos subjecting at least one

of the Charging Parties, and a class of male employees to sexual harassment in the workplace.
52.

General Manager Ratliff knew of the hostile work environment created by

Gallegos.
53.

General Manager Ratliff received repeated complaints from at least one of the

Charging Parties, and a class of male employees, about the sexual harassment in the workplace.
54.

General Manager Ratliff directly observed Gallegos subjecting the Charging

Parties, and a class of male employees to sexual harassment in the workplace.
55.

General Manager Ratliff encouraged, condoned, and requested Gallegos to

subject Charging Parties and a class of male employees to sexual harassment.
56.

Human Resources Director, Tom Stever, knew, or in the exercise of reasonable

care should have known of the hostile work environment created by Gallegos.
57.

Human Resources Director, Tom Stever, received repeated complaints from the

Charging Parties, and a class of male employees, about the sexual harassment in the workplace.

9

 Case 1:11-cv-00875-RB-CG Document 1 Filed 09/29/11 Page 10 of 20

58.

Defendant’s owner, Robert Pitre, knew, or in the exercise of reasonable care

should have known of the hostile work environment created by Gallegos.
59.

Defendant’s owner, Robert Pitre, received repeated complaints from at least one

of the Charging Parties, and a class of male employees, about the sexual harassment in the
workplace.
60.

Despite knowledge of the hostile work environment created by Gallegos,

Defendants failed to respond in an appropriate manner.
61.

Charging Parties and other male employees complained and/or objected to

Gallegos about his conduct.
62.

Despite these complaints, Gallegos did not cease his inappropriate and offensive

sexual comments and touching.
63.

Charging Parties and other male employees complained about and/or reported the

sexual harassment to various management officials, including without limitation, SM Ratliff,
GM Ratliff, Powers, Stever, and Pitre.
64.

Despite the employee complaints and reports of sexual harassment in the

workplace, Defendant failed to take prompt, appropriate, and effective remedial action(s).
65.

Instead, Defendant took retaliatory actions against Charging Parties and other

male employees who reported and/or complained about the sexual harassment to management.
66.

Charging Party Yob reported the sexual harassment to management as early as

April 2010.
67.

Immediately after Yob’s first sexual harassment complaint in April 2010,

Defendant negatively impacted Yob’s car sales earnings.

10

 Case 1:11-cv-00875-RB-CG Document 1 Filed 09/29/11 Page 11 of 20

a. After Yob’s complaints, non-existent costs were added to the vehicles Yob
sold, including but not limited to, non-existent and/or unnecessary repair fees,
and non-existent and/or unnecessary fuel costs.
b. After Yob’s complaints, Defendant required Yob to perform tasks away from
the car lot, preventing Yob from selling cars.
c. After Yob’s complaints, Defendant failed to pay certain commissions owed to
Yob for vehicles he sold, and instead gave the commissions to the dealership
and/or another employee.
d. After Yob’s complaints, Defendant purposely failed to provide Yob with
assistance with his customers, including but not limited to assistance in
obtaining temporary tags, retrieving vehicles from the car lot, and/or
retrieving keys to a car, resulting in lost sales.
e. After Yob’s complaints, Defendant failed to reimburse Yob for standard travel
expenses.
68.

Defendant’s managers made retaliatory comments to Charging Parties and other

male employees because of their complaints of sexual harassment, which included but not
limited to:
a. “You are causing waves, so either deal with it, shut up, or good luck making a
living;”
b. “You are not being a team player. I hope you intend to be a team player;”
c. “You are not going to ‘rat’ on us are you?”

11

 Case 1:11-cv-00875-RB-CG Document 1 Filed 09/29/11 Page 12 of 20

d. “You can sell as many cars as you want, you will continue to make minimum
wage.”
e. “Bob Pitre is worth 100 million dollars and his attorneys will eat you for
lunch.”
69.

On other occasions, the complaints fell on deaf ears and management and Human

Resources merely laughed, or made broken promises to remedy the situation.
70.

On other occasions, Charging Parties and other male employees were instructed

and/or encouraged by management and/or Owner Robert G. Pitre to take matters in their own
hands and cease the harassment by use of physical force.
71.

On or about July 28, 2010, Charging Party Yob was terminated immediately after

he adamantly complained about the sexual harassment to SM Ratliff.
72.

On July 31, 2010, Charging Party Yob’s employment was reinstated, because SM

Ratliff allegedly acted outside the scope of his authority.
73.

August 2, 2010, Defendant verbally reprimanded Gallegos subsequent to Yob’s

formal written complaint.
74.

After Defendant’s alleged remedial measures, Gallegos continued to subject

Charging Parties, and other male employees to sexual comments and harassment.
75.

After Defendant’s alleged remedial measures, Gallegos continued to inappropriate

touch male employees in an unwanted and sexual manner and solicit employees to perform
sexual acts with him.

12

 Case 1:11-cv-00875-RB-CG Document 1 Filed 09/29/11 Page 13 of 20

76.

On August 4, 2010, Charging Party Dulkerian made a formal written complaint to

management, reporting that Gallegos’ attempted to perform oral sex on Dulkerian in front of a
customer and Assistant Manager.
77.

On August 6, 2010, Defendant terminated Gallegos.

78.

On August 11, 2010, Charging Party Yob filed a Charge of Discrimination with

the EEOC.
79.

Even after Gallegos was terminated from his employment, Defendant continued

to subject Charging Party Yob to retaliatory actions, including but not limited to, a substantial
decrease in his commission earnings.
80.

On October 20, 2010, Charging Party Yob was constructively discharged from his

employment because the conditions were intolerable and untenable.
81.

In January 2011, Charging Party Dulkerian provided information to Defendant’s

attorney about the hostile work environment, and sexual harassment he and other employees
were subjected to by Gallegos.
82.

Immediately after Charging Party Dulkerian provided this information to

Defendant’s attorney, Dulkerian was subjected to higher level of scrutiny in his work
performance and constant threats of termination.
83.

On March 9, 2011, Charging Party Dulkerian filed a Charge of Discrimination

with the EEOC.
84.

Because of Gallegos’ sexual harassment and Defendant’s failure to address

Gallegos’ sexual harassment, and the retaliatory actions of Defendant, the working conditions

13

 Case 1:11-cv-00875-RB-CG Document 1 Filed 09/29/11 Page 14 of 20

for many male employees at Pitre Albuquerque, including but not limited to Charging Party Yob,
were intolerable, forcing them to resign.
FIRST CLAIM FOR RELIEF
[Pattern or Practice of Hostile Work Environment – 42 U.S.C. § 2000e-2(a), 2000e-5, 2000e-6]
85.

The allegations contained in the foregoing paragraphs are hereby incorporated by

reference with the same force and effect as if fully set forth herein.
86.

Since at least 2007 Defendant discriminated against Charging Party Sasha

Dulkerian in violation of Section 703(a), 706, and 707 of Title VII, 42 U.S.C. § 2000e-2(a),
2000e-5, 2000e-6, by creating and tolerating a hostile work environment because of his sex,
male.
87.

Since at least February 2010 Defendant discriminated against Charging Party

Richard Yob in violation of Section 703(a) of Title VII, 42 U.S.C. § 2000e-2(a), 2000e-5, 2000e6, by creating and tolerating a hostile work environment because of his sex, male.
88.

Since Gallegos’ hire in 1998, Defendant discriminated against a class of male

employees in violation of Section 703(a), 706, and 707 of Title VII, 42 U.S.C. §§ 2000e-2(a),
2000e-5, 2000e-6, by engaging in a pattern or practice of creating, and tolerating a hostile work
environment because of their sex, male.
89.

The inappropriate and offensive sexual conduct, as alleged in the preceding

paragraphs, was uninvited, unwelcome, and sufficiently severe or pervasive to alter the terms and
conditions of employment of Charging Parties and the class of male employees.
90.

Defendant, by and through GM Ratliff, and other supervisors or managers, were

aware of the severe or pervasive nature of the sexual harassment occurring at Pitre Albuquerque.
91.

GM Ratliff was a manager and supervisor of the men who were sexually harassed.

14

 Case 1:11-cv-00875-RB-CG Document 1 Filed 09/29/11 Page 15 of 20

92.

GM Ratliff requested and encouraged Gallegos to subject the Charging Parties

and other male employees to sexual comments, touching and other forms of sexual harassment.
93.

Defendant failed to take reasonable measures to prevent sexual harassment.

94.

Defendant failed to take reasonable measures to promptly correct sexual

harassment.
95.

Defendant knew or should have known about the sexual harassment and hostile

work environment that existed at Defendant Pitre’s car dealership managed by GM Ratliff.
96.

Defendant failed to take reasonable measures to prevent and promptly correct the

sexual harassment and hostile work environment at Defendant Pitre’s car dealership managed by
Ratliff.
97.

At least one member of management at Defendant Pitre’s car dealership was

directly responsible for the harassment and the creation of a hostile environment for Charging
Parties and the class of male employees.
98.

The unlawful employment practices described above were intentional.

99.

The unlawful employment practices complained of herein were done with malice

or with reckless indifference to the federally protected rights of Charging Parties and a class of
male employees.
100.

As a result of the events and actions described above, Richard Yob, Sasha

Dulkerian and the class of aggrieved male employees were deprived of equal employment
opportunities, suffered emotional distress, and were otherwise adversely affected because of sex.
SECOND CLAIM FOR RELIEF
[Constructive Discharge – 42 U.S.C. §§ 2000e-2(a)]

15

 Case 1:11-cv-00875-RB-CG Document 1 Filed 09/29/11 Page 16 of 20

101.

The allegations contained in the foregoing paragraphs are hereby incorporated by

reference with the same force and effect as if fully set forth herein.
102.

Defendant constructively discharged Charging Party Yob and a group of male

employees, in violation of section 703(a) of Title VII, 42 U.S.C. § 2000e-2(a), by creating and
tolerating a work environment permeated with sexual harassment and retaliatory conduct
subsequent to their objection to the sexual harassment.
103.

The working conditions created by the unlawful actions alleged in the preceding

paragraphs became so intolerable that a reasonable person would not have continued to subject
himself to those conditions.
104.

The unlawful employment practices described above were intentional.

105.

The unlawful employment practices complained of herein were done with malice

or with reckless indifference to the federally protected rights of Charging Party Yob and a group
of male employees who were constructively discharged.
106.

As a result of the events and actions described above, the Charging Party Yob and

aggrieved male employees lost wages and benefits, were deprived of equal employment
opportunities, suffered and are suffering emotional distress, and were and are otherwise
adversely affected because of the sexual harassment and retaliation.
THIRD CLAIM FOR RELIEF
[Title VII Retaliation- 42 U.S.C. §2000e-3(a)]
107.

The allegations contained in the foregoing paragraphs are hereby incorporated by

reference with the same force and effect as if fully set forth herein.
108.

Charging Party Yob and a class of male employees engaged in conduct protected

by Title VII when they reported to management sexually offensive conduct in the workplace.

16

 Case 1:11-cv-00875-RB-CG Document 1 Filed 09/29/11 Page 17 of 20

109.

Defendant Pitre engaged in unlawful retaliatory practices in violation of Section

704(a) of Title VII, 42 U.S.C. §2000e-3(a) directed at Charging Party Yob and other male
employees who reported or complained about the workplace sexual harassment.
110.

Defendant’s retaliatory practices included, without limitation, lowering

commission earnings, imposing heightened job scrutiny, imposing more onerous work standards,
engaging in retaliatory harassment, retaliatory discharge, and forcing Charging Party Yob and a
class of other male employees to constructively discharge from their employment.
111.

The effect of Defendant’s unlawful retaliatory practices was to deprive Charging

Parties and other male employees of equal employment opportunities and otherwise adversely
after their status as employees because of their engagement in protected activity under Title VII.
112.

The unlawful employment practices complained of above were intentional.

113.

The unlawful employment practices complained of above were done with malice

or reckless indifference to the federally protected rights of Charging Parties and a class of male
employees.
114.

As a result of the retaliation, Charging Parties and a class of male employees

suffered harm, including but not limited to lost earnings and benefits, deprived of equal
employment opportunities, suffered and are suffering emotional distress, and were and are
otherwise adversely affected because of sexual harassment and/or retaliation.
PRAYER FOR RELIEF
Wherefore, the Commission respectfully requests that this Court:
A.

Grant a permanent injunction enjoining Defendant, their officers, agents, servants,

employees, successors, assigns, and all persons in active concert or participation with them, from

17

 Case 1:11-cv-00875-RB-CG Document 1 Filed 09/29/11 Page 18 of 20

engaging in harassment of employees because of sex and any other employment practice which
discriminates on the basis of sex.
B.

Grant a permanent injunction enjoining Defendant, their officers, agents, servants,

employees, successors, assigns, and all persons in active concert or participation with them, from
engaging in retaliatory actions, including harassment, against employees because of their
engagement in protected activity.
C.

Order Defendant to institute and carry out policies, practices, and programs which

provide equal employment opportunities for male employees and which eradicate the effects of
their past and present unlawful employment practices, including sex discrimination.
D.

Order Defendant to institute and carry out policies, practices, and programs which

eradicate the effects of their past and present unlawful employment practices, including
retaliation.
E.

Order Defendant to make whole Charging Party Yob and the aggrieved male

employees by providing appropriate back pay and benefits with prejudgment interest in amounts
to be determined at trial and other affirmative relief necessary to eradicate the effects of
Defendants’ unlawful employment practices, including, but not limited to, reinstatement and/or
front pay in lieu of reinstatement.
D.

Order Defendant to make whole Charging Parties and the aggrieved male

employees by providing compensation for past and future pecuniary losses resulting from the
unlawful employment practices described above, including job search expenses, medical
expenses, and other pecuniary losses in amounts to be determined at trial.

18

 Case 1:11-cv-00875-RB-CG Document 1 Filed 09/29/11 Page 19 of 20

E.

Order Defendant to make whole Charging Parties and the aggrieved male

employees by providing compensation for past and future nonpecuniary losses resulting from the
unlawful practices complained of above, including, but not limited to, emotional pain, suffering,
inconvenience, mental anguish, humiliation, loss of enjoyment of life, and other nonpecuniary
losses, in amounts to be determined at trial.
F.

Order Defendant to pay Charging Parties and the aggrieved male employees

punitive damages for Defendants’ malicious and/or reckless conduct described above, in
amounts to be determined at trial.
G.

Grant such other and further relief as the Court deems just, necessary, equitable,

and proper in the public interest.
H.

Award the Commission its costs in this action.
JURY TRIAL DEMANDED
The Commission requests a jury trial on all questions of fact raised by its

complaint.

DATED September 29, 2011.
Respectfully submitted,
P. DAVID LOPEZ
General Counsel
GWENDOLYN YOUNG REAMS
Associate General Counsel
EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY
COMMISSION
131 M Street, N.E.
Washington, D.C. 20507

19

 Case 1:11-cv-00875-RB-CG Document 1 Filed 09/29/11 Page 20 of 20

MARY JO O’NEILL
Regional Attorney
EEOC Phoenix District Office
3300 North Central Avenue
Suite 690
Phoenix, Arizona 85012
RITA BYRNES KITTLE
Supervisory Trial Attorney
EEOC Denver Field Office
303 E. 17th Avenue, #410
Denver, CO 80203
Electronically Filed
/s/ Christina A. Vigil
CHRISTINA VIGIL, Trial Attorney
EEOC Albuquerque Area Office
505 Marquette NW, Suite 900
Albuquerque, New Mexico 87102
(505) 248-5231
christina.vigil@eeoc.gov
LORETTA MEDINA
Senior Trial Attorney
Attorneys for Plaintiff
PLEASE NOTE:
For purposes of service upon the EEOC, it is sufficient that pleadings, notices, and court
documents be served upon the Trial Attorneys. Duplicate service is not required on the
General Counsel and Associate General Counsel in Washington, D.C.

20

 Case 1:11-cv-00875-RB-CG Document 1-1 Filed 09/29/11 Page 1 of 2

2JS 44 (Rev. 12/07)

CIVIL COVER SHEET

The JS 44 civil cover sheet and the information contained herein neither replace nor supplement the filing and service of pleadings or other papers as required by law, except as provided
by local rules of court. This form, approved by the Judicial Conference of the United States in September 1974, is required for the use of the Clerk of Court for the purpose of initiating
the civil docket sheet. (SEE INSTRUCTIONS ON THE REVERSE OF THE FORM.)

I. (a) PLAINTIFFS

DEFENDANTS

Equal Employment Opportunity Commission

Pitre Inc. d/b/a Pitre Buick/Pontiac

(b) County of Residence of First Listed Plaintiff

County of Residence of First Listed Defendant

(EXCEPT IN U.S. PLAINTIFF CASES)

Bernalillo

(IN U.S. PLAINTIFF CASES ONLY)
NOTE: IN LAND CONDEMNATION CASES, USE THE LOCATION OF THE
LAND INVOLVED.

(c) Attorney’s (Firm Name, Address, and Telephone Number)

Attorneys (If Known)

505 Marquette Ave NW, Suite 900
Albuquerque, NM 87102
(505) 248-5231

II. BASIS OF JURISDICTION

(Place an “X” in One Box Only)

III. CITIZENSHIP OF PRINCIPAL PARTIES(Place an “X” in One Box for Plaintiff

u 1

U.S. Government
Plaintiff

u 3 Federal Question
(U.S. Government Not a Party)

(For Diversity Cases Only)
PTF
u 1
Citizen of This State

u 2

U.S. Government
Defendant

u 4 Diversity

Citizen of Another State

u 2

u

2

Incorporated and Principal Place
of Business In Another State

u 5

u 5

Citizen or Subject of a
Foreign Country

u 3

u

3

Foreign Nation

u 6

u 6

(Indicate Citizenship of Parties in Item III)

IV. NATURE OF SUIT
CONTRACT

u
u
u
u
u
u
u
u
u
u
u
u
u
u
u
u
u
u

110 Insurance
120 Marine
130 Miller Act
140 Negotiable Instrument
150 Recovery of Overpayment
& Enforcement of Judgment
151 Medicare Act
152 Recovery of Defaulted
Student Loans
(Excl. Veterans)
153 Recovery of Overpayment
of Veteran’s Benefits
160 Stockholders’ Suits
190 Other Contract
195 Contract Product Liability
196 Franchise
REAL PROPERTY
210 Land Condemnation
220 Foreclosure
230 Rent Lease & Ejectment
240 Torts to Land
245 Tort Product Liability
290 All Other Real Property

u
u
u
u
u
u
u
u
u
u
u
u
u
u
u
u

V. ORIGIN

u 1 Original
Proceeding

and One Box for Defendant)
PTF
DEF
Incorporated or Principal Place
u 4
u 4
of Business In This State

DEF
u 1

(Place an “X” in One Box Only)
TORTS
PERSONAL INJURY
310 Airplane
315 Airplane Product
Liability
320 Assault, Libel &
Slander
330 Federal Employers’
Liability
340 Marine
345 Marine Product
Liability
350 Motor Vehicle
355 Motor Vehicle
Product Liability
360 Other Personal
Injury
CIVIL RIGHTS
441 Voting
442 Employment
443 Housing/
Accommodations
444 Welfare
445 Amer. w/Disabilities Employment
446 Amer. w/Disabilities Other
440 Other Civil Rights

FORFEITURE/PENALTY

PERSONAL INJURY
u 362 Personal Injury Med. Malpractice
u 365 Personal Injury Product Liability
u 368 Asbestos Personal
Injury Product
Liability
PERSONAL PROPERTY
u 370 Other Fraud
u 371 Truth in Lending
u 380 Other Personal
Property Damage
u 385 Property Damage
Product Liability
PRISONER PETITIONS
u 510 Motions to Vacate
Sentence
Habeas Corpus:
u 530 General
u 535 Death Penalty
u 540 Mandamus & Other
u 550 Civil Rights
u 555 Prison Condition

State Court

BANKRUPTCY

u 422 Appeal 28 USC 158
u 423 Withdrawal
28 USC 157
PROPERTY RIGHTS
u 820 Copyrights
u 830 Patent
u 840 Trademark

SOCIAL SECURITY
861 HIA (1395ff)
862 Black Lung (923)
863 DIWC/DIWW (405(g))
864 SSID Title XVI
865 RSI (405(g))
FEDERAL TAX SUITS
u 870 Taxes (U.S. Plaintiff
or Defendant)
u 871 IRS—Third Party
26 USC 7609

u
u
u
u
u

OTHER STATUTES

u
u
u
u
u
u
u
u
u
u
u
u
u
u
u
u
u
u

IMMIGRATION
u 462 Naturalization Application
u 463 Habeas Corpus Alien Detainee
u 465 Other Immigration
Actions

u

400 State Reapportionment
410 Antitrust
430 Banks and Banking
450 Commerce
460 Deportation
470 Racketeer Influenced and
Corrupt Organizations
480 Consumer Credit
490 Cable/Sat TV
810 Selective Service
850 Securities/Commodities/
Exchange
875 Customer Challenge
12 USC 3410
890 Other Statutory Actions
891 Agricultural Acts
892 Economic Stabilization Act
893 Environmental Matters
894 Energy Allocation Act
895 Freedom of Information
Act
900Appeal of Fee Determination
Under Equal Access
to Justice
950 Constitutionality of
State Statutes

Appeal to District

(Place an “X” in One Box Only)

u 2 Removed from

u 610 Agriculture
u 620 Other Food & Drug
u 625 Drug Related Seizure
of Property 21 USC 881
u 630 Liquor Laws
u 640 R.R. & Truck
u 650 Airline Regs.
u 660 Occupational
Safety/Health
u 690 Other
LABOR
u 710 Fair Labor Standards
Act
u 720 Labor/Mgmt. Relations
u 730 Labor/Mgmt.Reporting
& Disclosure Act
u 740 Railway Labor Act
u 790 Other Labor Litigation
u 791 Empl. Ret. Inc.
Security Act

u 3 Remanded from
Appellate Court

from
u 4 Reinstated or u 5 Transferred
u 6 Multidistrict
another district
Reopened
Litigation
(specify)

from
u 7 Judge
Magistrate
Judgment

Cite the U.S. Civil Statute under which you are filing (Do not cite jurisdictional statutes unless diversity):

Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and Title I of the Civil Rights Act of 1991.

VI. CAUSE OF ACTION Brief description of cause:

This is an action to correct unlawful employment practices on the basis of sex and retaliation.

u CHECK IF THIS IS A CLASS ACTION
VII. REQUESTED IN
UNDER F.R.C.P. 23
COMPLAINT:
VIII. RELATED CASE(S)
(See instructions):
JUDGE
IF ANY
DATE

CHECK YES only if demanded in complaint:
✔
u Yes
u No
JURY DEMAND:

DEMAND $

DOCKET NUMBER

SIGNATURE OF ATTORNEY OF RECORD

/s/ Christina Vigil

09/29/2011
FOR OFFICE USE ONLY
RECEIPT #

AMOUNT

APPLYING IFP

JUDGE

MAG. JUDGE

 JS 44 Reverse (Rev. 12/07)

Case 1:11-cv-00875-RB-CG Document 1-1 Filed 09/29/11 Page 2 of 2

INSTRUCTIONS FOR ATTORNEYS COMPLETING CIVIL COVER SHEET FORM JS 44
Authority For Civil Cover Sheet
The JS 44 civil cover sheet and the information contained herein neither replaces nor supplements the filings and service of pleading or other papers as required
by law, except as provided by local rules of court. This form, approved by the Judicial Conference of the United States in September 1974, is required for the use
of the Clerk of Court for the purpose of initiating the civil docket sheet. Consequently, a civil cover sheet is submitted to the Clerk of Court for each civil complaint
filed. The attorney filing a case should complete the form as follows:
I.
(a) Plaintiffs-Defendants. Enter names (last, first, middle initial) of plaintiff and defendant. If the plaintiff or defendant is a government agency, use only
the full name or standard abbreviations. If the plaintiff or defendant is an official within a government agency, identify first the agency and then the official, giving
both name and title.
(b) County of Residence. For each civil case filed, except U.S. plaintiff cases, enter the name of the county where the first listed plaintiff resides at the time
of filing. In U.S. plaintiff cases, enter the name of the county in which the first listed defendant resides at the time of filing. (NOTE: In land condemnation cases,
the county of residence of the “defendant” is the location of the tract of land involved.)
(c) Attorneys. Enter the firm name, address, telephone number, and attorney of record. If there are several attorneys, list them on an attachment, noting
in this section “(see attachment)”.
II.
Jurisdiction. The basis of jurisdiction is set forth under Rule 8(a), F.R.C.P., which requires that jurisdictions be shown in pleadings. Place an “X” in one
of the boxes. If there is more than one basis of jurisdiction, precedence is given in the order shown below.
United States plaintiff. (1) Jurisdiction based on 28 U.S.C. 1345 and 1348. Suits by agencies and officers of the United States are included here.
United States defendant. (2) When the plaintiff is suing the United States, its officers or agencies, place an “X” in this box.
Federal question. (3) This refers to suits under 28 U.S.C. 1331, where jurisdiction arises under the Constitution of the United States, an amendment to the
Constitution, an act of Congress or a treaty of the United States. In cases where the U.S. is a party, the U.S. plaintiff or defendant code takes precedence, and box
1 or 2 should be marked.
Diversity of citizenship. (4) This refers to suits under 28 U.S.C. 1332, where parties are citizens of different states. When Box 4 is checked, the citizenship of the
different parties must be checked. (See Section III below; federal question actions take precedence over diversity cases.)
III.
Residence (citizenship) of Principal Parties. This section of the JS 44 is to be completed if diversity of citizenship was indicated above. Mark this section
for each principal party.
IV.
Nature of Suit. Place an “X” in the appropriate box. If the nature of suit cannot be determined, be sure the cause of action, in Section VI below, is sufficient
to enable the deputy clerk or the statistical clerks in the Administrative Office to determine the nature of suit. If the cause fits more than one nature of suit, select
the most definitive.
V.

Origin. Place an “X” in one of the seven boxes.

Original Proceedings. (1) Cases which originate in the United States district courts.
Removed from State Court. (2) Proceedings initiated in state courts may be removed to the district courts under Title 28 U.S.C., Section 1441. When the petition
for removal is granted, check this box.
Remanded from Appellate Court. (3) Check this box for cases remanded to the district court for further action. Use the date of remand as the filing date.
Reinstated or Reopened. (4) Check this box for cases reinstated or reopened in the district court. Use the reopening date as the filing date.
Transferred from Another District. (5) For cases transferred under Title 28 U.S.C. Section 1404(a). Do not use this for within district transfers or multidistrict
litigation transfers.
Multidistrict Litigation. (6) Check this box when a multidistrict case is transferred into the district under authority of Title 28 U.S.C. Section 1407. When this box
is checked, do not check (5) above.
Appeal to District Judge from Magistrate Judgment. (7) Check this box for an appeal from a magistrate judge’s decision.
VI.
Cause of Action. Report the civil statute directly related to the cause of action and give a brief description of the cause. Do not cite jurisdictional statutes
unless diversity.
Example:
U.S. Civil Statute: 47 USC 553
Brief Description: Unauthorized reception of cable service
VII.

Requested in Complaint. Class Action. Place an “X” in this box if you are filing a class action under Rule 23, F.R.Cv.P.

Demand. In this space enter the dollar amount (in thousands of dollars) being demanded or indicate other demand such as a preliminary injunction.
Jury Demand. Check the appropriate box to indicate whether or not a jury is being demanded.
VIII. Related Cases. This section of the JS 44 is used to reference related pending cases if any. If there are related pending cases, insert the docket numbers
and the corresponding judge names for such cases.
Date and Attorney Signature. Date and sign the civil cover sheet.