University of Michigan Law School
Civil Rights Litigation Clearinghouse
new search
page permalink
Case Name Dukes v. Wal-Mart Stores, Inc. EE-CA-0303
Docket / Court 3:01-cv-02252 ( N.D. Cal. )
State/Territory California
Case Type(s) Equal Employment
Special Collection Private Employment Class Actions
Attorney Organization Impact Fund
Case Summary
On June 8, 2001, a female Wal-Mart employee filed a class-action complaint in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California (San Francisco) against her employer claiming gender discrimination. Although the original complaint was filed pro se, on June 19, 2001, Plaintiffs filed an ... read more >
On June 8, 2001, a female Wal-Mart employee filed a class-action complaint in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California (San Francisco) against her employer claiming gender discrimination. Although the original complaint was filed pro se, on June 19, 2001, Plaintiffs filed an amended complaint with counsel. Dozens of lawyers have worked on this case, but the lead counsel is Brad Seligman of the Impact Fund, a nonprofit advocacy group. Plaintiffs filed their third amended complaint on September 12, 2002.

The named Plaintiffs represent a class consisting of "all women employed at any Wal-Mart domestic retail store at any time since December 26, 1998 who have been or may be subjected to Wal-Mart's challenged pay and management track promotions policies and practices." Estimates of the size of this class range from 700,000 to 1.5 million women. Plaintiffs allege gender discrimination in violation of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act. Specifically, they argue that Wal-Mart's corporate culture fostered ideals of male superiority, which resulted in fewer raises and promotions for female employees. Those women who did receive raises and promotions, the plaintiffs allege, received them on a smaller scale and more slowly than male employees.

Wal-Mart is the largest private employer in the world and the largest retail chain in the United States.

The plaintiff class brought gender discrimination claims under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. Two of the named Plaintiffs, both black, also brought claims under California's Fair Employment and Housing Act for racial discrimination.

Plaintiffs sought relief in the form of back pay, front pay, lost compensation and benefits, and punitive damages. Two of the named Plaintiffs also sought damages for emotional distress under California's Fair Employment and Housing Act.

Additionally, Plaintiffs sought injunctive relief prohibiting discriminatory practices, restoring employees who quit or who Wal-Mart fired to their previous positions, and adjusting wage rates of current employees to what they would have been had Wal-Mart not discriminated.

The issue of class certification dominated early proceedings. Defendant vigorously contested certification of such a large and broad class.

The district court certified the class on June 21, 2004. Dukes v. Wal-Mart Stores, Inc., 222 F.R.D. 137 (N.D. Cal. 2004). The Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit affirmed the district court's order in part on February 6, 2007, but then withdrew its opinion. Dukes v. Wal-Mart Stores, Inc., 474 F.3d 1214 (9th Cir. 2007). The Ninth Circuit then issued a new opinion, affirming in part the district court's order, on December 11, 2007. Dukes v. Wal-Mart Stores, Inc., 509 F.3d 1168 (9th Cir. 2007). Finally, the Ninth Circuit upheld its prior decision after a rehearing en banc. Dukes v. Wal-Mart Stores, Inc., 603 F.3d 571 (9th Cir. 2010). The Court of Appeals decisions were docketed under 04-16688 and 04-16720, the latter covering a cross-appeal by Plaintiffs-Appellees.

The Ninth Circuit affirmed most of the district court's order but remanded to determine whether the class could be certified as to punitive damages. Additionally, the Court limited the ability of some of the named Plaintiffs to receive back pay for expected promotions if there was no "objective data" on hand to prove they were in a position to receive a promotion and that the court would not rely on speculation.

Additionally, the Ninth Circuit indicated that putative class members who were no longer employed at the time Plaintiffs filed their complaint could not participate in the injunctive or declaratory relief of the suit, although they could be entitled to damages under Federal Rule of Civil 23(b)(3). The Ninth Circuit indicated that although the plaintiffs sought to certify the class under Rule 23(b)(2), which is for claims seeking injunctive relief, the district court on remand could certify some claims under Rule 23(b)(3), such as the punitive damage claims. Overall, the potentially large monetary award of this case did not prevent certification under Rule 23(b)(2).

The class certification litigation did touch upon the merits of Plaintiffs' claims. Plaintiffs presented anecdotal evidence of discrimination through the testimony of the named Plaintiffs and other employees. Plaintiffs also presented expert testimony of statisticians and sociologists to demonstrate that Wal-Mart's corporate structure encouraged a culture of gender discrimination. Wal-Mart countered with its own statistician, but the district and appellate courts found them less persuasive. Of course, the Ninth Circuit noted that in this preliminary stage, it was not in fact evaluating the credibility of this testimony, but was rather attempting to determine if there were issues of commonality between class members that warranted certification.

Because of the split in the circuits regarding the standard by which to evaluate class certification, the Supreme Court granted the writ of certiorari on December 06, 2010. The case was argued before the Supreme Court on March 29, 2011 and decided on June 20, 2011.

In a 5-4 vote pitting conservative justices against liberal justices, the Supreme Court ruled that Wal-Mart's policy of granting local supervisors discretion in pay and promotion decisions, which allegedly has a disparate impact on female employees, did not provide a common question of fact, as required for class certification under Rule 23(a)(2). Wal-Mart v. Dukes, No. 10-277, 2011 WL 2437013 (June 20, 2011). Justice Scalia delivered the opinion of the Court and was joined by Justices Roberts, Thomas, Kennedy, and Alito. Justice Ginsburg wrote an opinion dissenting on the Rule 23(a)(2) question and was joined by Justices Breyer, Sotomayor, and Kagan. All justices agreed that the back pay claims in the case were improperly certified under Rule 23(b)(2).

The Court concluded that the evidence presented of Wal-Mart's alleged discriminatory policies was insufficient to warrant class certification. Relying on General Telephone Co. of Southwest v. Falcon, it found that the plaintiffs needed to show "[s]ignificant proof that an employer operated under a general policy of discrimination." 457 U.S. 147, 159, n. 15 (1982). Because the expert upon whom Plaintiffs relied was not able to specify the extent to which stereotypes affected employment decisions, the Court deemed that his testimony did not meet this standard.

Apart from this rejected evidence, the majority found that Plaintiffs did "not identif[y] a common mode of exercising discretion that pervades the entire company," citing Watson v. Fort Worth Bank & Trust to declare that the plaintiffs needed to "identify[] the specific employment practice that is challenged." 487 U.S. 977, 994 (1988). Based on this principle the Court rejected Plaintiffs' statistical and anecdotal evidence for failing to identify particular practices that affected the entire class. The statistical evidence, said the Court, pointed only to the existence of disparities rather than to any common practice, and the anecdotal evidence was too little and not sufficiently representative for the size of class certified. As a result, the Court concluded that "there is [not] even a single common question" that ties the class together (internal quotes omitted).

Justice Ginsburg dissented from this conclusion. After questioning the majority's scrutiny of the District Court's discretion regarding Rule 23(a), she focused on Watson's conclusion that practices not motivated by discriminatory intent, but that produce discriminatory results, do give rise to Title VII claims. For the instant case, Justice Ginsburg noted that managers may be susceptible to unconscious biases, and that Wal-Mart's uniform policy of discretion does nothing to combat such biases. Thus, she argued, there was sufficient basis for class certification and the majority had mistakenly imported Rule 23(b)(3)'s requirements into 23(a)(2), effectively requiring the common questions of law or fact to predominate over individual questions. (Justice Ginsburg's opinion also dismisses Falcon, which dealt with intentional discrimination, as irrelevant, since the instant case, which involves disparate treatment, involved Wal-Mart's companywide policies affecting all female workers.)

The Court unanimously agreed that the back pay claims in the case could not be certified under Rule 23(b)(2) because "the monetary relief is not incidental to the injunctive or declaratory relief." It characterized the back pay claims as individualized relief against which a defendant could provide defenses against specific plaintiffs. It also noted that only Rule 23(b)(3) would be appropriate for back pay claims, since that provision, and not (b)(2), offers procedural protections like mandatory notice and the ability to opt out.

The upshot is that if aggrieved female employees wish to sue Wal-Mart, they must do so individually. The decision's effect on class actions generally is yet to be seen.

Xin Chen - 07/05/2011


compress summary

- click to show/hide ALL -
Issues and Causes of Action
click to show/hide detail
Issues
Affected Gender
Female
Defendant-type
Retailer
Discrimination-area
Demotion
Discharge / Constructive Discharge / Layoff
Discipline
Harassment / Hostile Work Environment
Other Conditions of Employment (including assignment, transfer, hours, working conditions, etc)
Pay / Benefits
Promotion
Seniority
Training
Discrimination-basis
Race discrimination
Sex discrimination
General
Disparate Impact
Disparate Treatment
Pattern or Practice
Retaliation
Plaintiff Type
Private Plaintiff
Race
American Indian/Alaskan Native
Asian/Pacific Islander
Black
White
Causes of Action Title VII (including PDA), 42 U.S.C. § 2000e
Defendant(s) Wal-Mart Stores, Inc.
Plaintiff Description All women, from part-time hourly workers to salaried managers, whom Wal-Mart denied raises and promotions because of an alleged culture of gender discrimination.
Indexed Lawyer Organizations Impact Fund
Class action status sought Yes
Class action status granted Yes
Prevailing Party None Yet / None
Public Int. Lawyer Yes
Nature of Relief None yet
Source of Relief None yet
Form of Settlement None on record
Order Duration not on record
Case Closing Year n/a
Case Ongoing Yes
Additional Resources
click to show/hide detail
Case Studies Megacases, Diversity, and the Elusive Goal of Workplace Reform
Written: Mar. 01, 2008
By: Nancy Levit (University of Missouri-Kansas City School of Law)
Citation: 49 B.C. L. Rev. 367 (2008)
[ Detail ] [ External Link ]

  Second Generation Employment Discrimination: A Structural Approach
By: Susan Sturm (Columbia Law School)
Citation: 101 Colum. L. Rev. 458 (2001)
[ Detail ] [ External Link ]

  Selling Women Short: The Landmark Battle for Workers' Rights at Wal-mart
By: Liza Featherstone
Citation: (2004)
[ Detail ]

Docket(s)
Court of Appeals 02-80008 (U.S. Court of Appeals) 03/18/2002
EE-CA-0303-9003 PDF | Detail
PACER [Public Access to Court Electronic Records]
Court of Appeals 04-80057 (U.S. Court of Appeals) 03/10/2009
EE-CA-0303-9002 PDF | Detail
PACER [Public Access to Court Electronic Records]
Court of Appeals 04-16688 (U.S. Court of Appeals) 04/26/2010
EE-CA-0303-9004 PDF | Detail
PACER [Public Access to Court Electronic Records]
Court of Appeals 04-16720 (U.S. Court of Appeals) 02/01/2011
EE-CA-0303-9005 PDF | Detail
PACER [Public Access to Court Electronic Records]
3:01-cv-02252-CRB (N.D. Cal.) 07/01/2011
EE-CA-0303-9001 PDF | Detail
PACER [Public Access to Court Electronic Records]
General Documents
Complaint (Third Amended) 09/12/2002
EE-CA-0303-0003 PDF | Detail
Document Source: Impact Fund
Plaintiff's Motion For Class Certification 07/25/2003
EE-CA-0303-0004 PDF | Detail
Document Source: PACER [Public Access to Court Electronic Records]
Order Granting In Part And Denying In Part Motion To Certify Class 06/21/2004 (222 F.R.D. 137) (N.D. Cal.)
EE-CA-0303-0023 PDF | WESTLAW| LEXIS | Detail
Document Source: Google Scholar
Order Granting In Part And Denying In Part Plaintiffs' And Defendant's Motions To Strike Expert And Nonexpert Testimony 06/21/2004 (222 F.R.D. 189) (N.D. Cal.)
EE-CA-0303-0024 PDF | WESTLAW| LEXIS | Detail
Document Source: Google Scholar
Principal Brief for Wal-Mart Stores, Inc. 11/29/2004
EE-CA-0303-0015 PDF | Detail
Document Source: Westlaw
Opening Brief For Appellees And Cross Appellants 12/29/2004
EE-CA-0303-0006 PDF | Detail
Document Source: PACER [Public Access to Court Electronic Records]
Brief of Amici Curiae Center For Constitutional Rights, Communities For A Better Environment, Consumers Union, National Consumer Law Center In Support Of Plaintiffs/Appellees/Cross-Appellants Dukes, Et Al 01/10/2005
EE-CA-0303-0010 PDF | Detail
Document Source: Impact Fund
Reply Brief Of Appellees And Cross-Appellants In Support Of Cross Appeal. 02/11/2005
EE-CA-0303-0008 PDF | Detail
Document Source: PACER [Public Access to Court Electronic Records]
WITHDRAWN Opinion Affirming In Part Disrict Court's Order Order Granting In Part and Denying In Part Motion To Certify Class 02/06/2007 (474 F.3d 1214)
EE-CA-0303-0022 PDF | WESTLAW| LEXIS | Detail
Document Source: Google Scholar
Plaintiff's Brief In Opposition To Defendant's Petition For Rehearing En Banc. 03/15/2007
EE-CA-0303-0005 PDF | Detail
Document Source: PACER [Public Access to Court Electronic Records]
Brief Of Amici Curiae Consumers Union, National Consumer Law Center, Center For Constitutional Rights, And Communities For A Better Environment In Opposition To Rehearing En Banc 03/27/2007
EE-CA-0303-0011 PDF | Detail
Document Source: Impact Fund
SUPERCEDED Opinion Affirming In Part Disrict Court's Order Order Granting In Part and Denying In Part Motion To Certify Class 12/11/2007 (509 F.3d 1168)
EE-CA-0303-0021 PDF | WESTLAW| LEXIS | Detail
Document Source: Google Scholar
Plaintiffs' Petition For Panel (En Banc) Rehearing 01/08/2008
EE-CA-0303-0007 PDF | Detail
Document Source: PACER [Public Access to Court Electronic Records]
Order To Rehear En Banc Appeal Of Disrict Court's Order Order Granting In Part and Denying In Part Motion To Certify Class 02/13/2009 (556 F.3d 919)
EE-CA-0303-0020 PDF | WESTLAW| LEXIS | Detail
Document Source: Google Scholar
Brief Amici Curiae Of AARP And The California Women’s Law Center (CWLC) In Support Of Appellees And Cross-Appellants Supporting Reversal Of That Part Of The District Court’s Class Certification Order Limiting Back Pay Relief For Promotion Claims 03/09/2009
EE-CA-0303-0009 PDF | Detail
Document Source: Impact Fund
Brief of the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission as Amicus Curiae in Support of Plaintiffs on Rehearing En Banc 03/19/2009
EE-CA-0303-0016 PDF | Detail
Document Source: Westlaw
Press Release 04/26/2010
EE-CA-0303-0001 PDF | Detail
Document Source: Plaintiffs' counsel
Ninth Circuit Opinion (En Banc) 04/26/2010 (603 F.3d 571)
EE-CA-0303-0002 PDF | WESTLAW| LEXIS | Detail
Document Source: PACER [Public Access to Court Electronic Records]
Petition for a Writ of Certiorari 08/25/2010 (2010 WL 3355820)
EE-CA-0303-0017 PDF | WESTLAW | Detail
Document Source: Westlaw
Brief for Petitioner 01/20/2011 (2011 WL 201045)
EE-CA-0303-0018 PDF | WESTLAW | Detail
Document Source: Westlaw
Brief for Respondents 02/22/2011 (2011 WL 686407)
EE-CA-0303-0019 PDF | WESTLAW | Detail
Document Source: Westlaw
Supreme Court Opinion 06/20/2011 (131 S.Ct. 2541)
EE-CA-0303-0014 PDF | WESTLAW | Detail
Document Source: Supreme Court website
Judges Chen, Edward Milton (N.D. Cal.) [Magistrate]
EE-CA-0303-9001
Graber, Susan (Ninth Circuit)
EE-CA-0303-0002
Hawkins, Michael Daly (Ninth Circuit)
EE-CA-0303-0002
Ikuta, Sandra Segal (Ninth Circuit)
EE-CA-0303-0002
Jenkins, Martin J. (N.D. Cal.)
EE-CA-0303-0003 | EE-CA-0303-0005 | EE-CA-0303-0023 | EE-CA-0303-0024 | EE-CA-0303-9001 | EE-CA-0303-9002 | EE-CA-0303-9003 | EE-CA-0303-9004 | EE-CA-0303-9005
Kleinfeld, Andrew Jay (Ninth Circuit, D. Alaska) [Magistrate]
EE-CA-0303-0021 | EE-CA-0303-0022
Kozinski, Alex (Ninth Circuit)
EE-CA-0303-0002 | EE-CA-0303-0020
Pregerson, Harry (C.D. Cal., Ninth Circuit)
EE-CA-0303-0021 | EE-CA-0303-0022
Scalia, Antonin (SCOTUS, D.C. Circuit)
EE-CA-0303-0014
Walker, Vaughn R. (N.D. Cal.)
EE-CA-0303-9001
Monitors/Masters None on record
Plaintiff's Lawyers Bennett, Merit (New Mexico)
EE-CA-0303-0003 | EE-CA-0303-0004 | EE-CA-0303-0005 | EE-CA-0303-0006 | EE-CA-0303-0007 | EE-CA-0303-0008 | EE-CA-0303-0019 | EE-CA-0303-0020 | EE-CA-0303-0021 | EE-CA-0303-0022 | EE-CA-0303-0023 | EE-CA-0303-0024 | EE-CA-0303-9001
Firth, Charles V. (New Mexico)
EE-CA-0303-0005 | EE-CA-0303-0006 | EE-CA-0303-0008 | EE-CA-0303-0020 | EE-CA-0303-0023 | EE-CA-0303-0024 | EE-CA-0303-9001
Gardner, Debra (Maryland)
EE-CA-0303-0003 | EE-CA-0303-0004 | EE-CA-0303-0005 | EE-CA-0303-0006 | EE-CA-0303-0007 | EE-CA-0303-0008 | EE-CA-0303-0020 | EE-CA-0303-0021 | EE-CA-0303-0022 | EE-CA-0303-0023 | EE-CA-0303-0024 | EE-CA-0303-9001
Goldsmith, Julie (District of Columbia)
EE-CA-0303-0004
Herrera, Irma (California)
EE-CA-0303-0004 | EE-CA-0303-0005 | EE-CA-0303-0006 | EE-CA-0303-0007 | EE-CA-0303-0008 | EE-CA-0303-0020 | EE-CA-0303-0021 | EE-CA-0303-0022 | EE-CA-0303-9001
Kosh, Talia (New Mexico)
EE-CA-0303-0005
Kotagal, Kalpana (District of Columbia)
EE-CA-0303-0019
Larkin, Jocelyn Dion (California)
EE-CA-0303-0003 | EE-CA-0303-0004 | EE-CA-0303-0005 | EE-CA-0303-0006 | EE-CA-0303-0007 | EE-CA-0303-0008 | EE-CA-0303-0019 | EE-CA-0303-0020 | EE-CA-0303-0021 | EE-CA-0303-0022 | EE-CA-0303-0023 | EE-CA-0303-0024 | EE-CA-0303-9001
Lawrence, Elizabeth A. (California)
EE-CA-0303-0003 | EE-CA-0303-0004 | EE-CA-0303-0005 | EE-CA-0303-0006 | EE-CA-0303-0008 | EE-CA-0303-0019 | EE-CA-0303-0020 | EE-CA-0303-0021 | EE-CA-0303-0022 | EE-CA-0303-0023 | EE-CA-0303-0024 | EE-CA-0303-9001
Marshall, Shauna Iris (California)
EE-CA-0303-0003 | EE-CA-0303-0004 | EE-CA-0303-0005 | EE-CA-0303-0006 | EE-CA-0303-0007 | EE-CA-0303-0008 | EE-CA-0303-0020 | EE-CA-0303-0023 | EE-CA-0303-0024 | EE-CA-0303-9001
Molumphy, Mark Cotten (California)
EE-CA-0303-9001
Ng, Doris (California)
EE-CA-0303-0003 | EE-CA-0303-0023 | EE-CA-0303-0024
Reiser, Julie Goldsmith (District of Columbia)
EE-CA-0303-0005 | EE-CA-0303-0006 | EE-CA-0303-0008 | EE-CA-0303-0021 | EE-CA-0303-0022
Seligman, Brad (California)
EE-CA-0303-0002 | EE-CA-0303-0003 | EE-CA-0303-0004 | EE-CA-0303-0005 | EE-CA-0303-0006 | EE-CA-0303-0007 | EE-CA-0303-0008 | EE-CA-0303-0019 | EE-CA-0303-0020 | EE-CA-0303-0021 | EE-CA-0303-0022 | EE-CA-0303-0023 | EE-CA-0303-0024 | EE-CA-0303-9001
Sellers, Joseph Marc (District of Columbia)
EE-CA-0303-0003 | EE-CA-0303-0004 | EE-CA-0303-0005 | EE-CA-0303-0006 | EE-CA-0303-0007 | EE-CA-0303-0008 | EE-CA-0303-0019 | EE-CA-0303-0020 | EE-CA-0303-0021 | EE-CA-0303-0022 | EE-CA-0303-0023 | EE-CA-0303-0024 | EE-CA-0303-9001
Smith, Debra A. (California)
EE-CA-0303-0004 | EE-CA-0303-0005 | EE-CA-0303-0006 | EE-CA-0303-0007 | EE-CA-0303-0008 | EE-CA-0303-0020 | EE-CA-0303-0021 | EE-CA-0303-0022 | EE-CA-0303-9001 | EE-CA-0303-9001
Smith, Jonathan Mark (District of Columbia)
EE-CA-0303-0020 | EE-CA-0303-0023 | EE-CA-0303-0024 | EE-CA-0303-9001
Stemerman, Steven L. (California)
EE-CA-0303-0003 | EE-CA-0303-0004 | EE-CA-0303-0005 | EE-CA-0303-0006 | EE-CA-0303-0007 | EE-CA-0303-0008 | EE-CA-0303-0019 | EE-CA-0303-0020 | EE-CA-0303-0021 | EE-CA-0303-0023 | EE-CA-0303-0024 | EE-CA-0303-9001
Thomas, Sheila Yvette (California)
EE-CA-0303-0003 | EE-CA-0303-0004 | EE-CA-0303-0005 | EE-CA-0303-0006 | EE-CA-0303-0007 | EE-CA-0303-0008 | EE-CA-0303-0019 | EE-CA-0303-0020 | EE-CA-0303-0023 | EE-CA-0303-0024 | EE-CA-0303-9001
Tinkler, Stephen (New Mexico)
EE-CA-0303-0003 | EE-CA-0303-0004 | EE-CA-0303-0005 | EE-CA-0303-0006 | EE-CA-0303-0007 | EE-CA-0303-0008 | EE-CA-0303-0019 | EE-CA-0303-0021 | EE-CA-0303-0022 | EE-CA-0303-0023 | EE-CA-0303-0024 | EE-CA-0303-9001
Tompkins, Charles E. (District of Columbia)
EE-CA-0303-0004 | EE-CA-0303-0005 | EE-CA-0303-0006 | EE-CA-0303-0008
Vagins, Deborah (District of Columbia)
EE-CA-0303-0020 | EE-CA-0303-0023 | EE-CA-0303-0024 | EE-CA-0303-9001
Varela, Sarah (California)
EE-CA-0303-0005
Webber, Christine E. (District of Columbia)
EE-CA-0303-0003 | EE-CA-0303-0004 | EE-CA-0303-0005 | EE-CA-0303-0006 | EE-CA-0303-0007 | EE-CA-0303-0008 | EE-CA-0303-0019 | EE-CA-0303-0020 | EE-CA-0303-0021 | EE-CA-0303-0022 | EE-CA-0303-0023 | EE-CA-0303-0024 | EE-CA-0303-9001
Yang, Jenny R. (District of Columbia)
EE-CA-0303-0007 | EE-CA-0303-0019 | EE-CA-0303-9001
Defendant's Lawyers Abell, Nancy L. (California)
EE-CA-0303-0015 | EE-CA-0303-0020 | EE-CA-0303-0023 | EE-CA-0303-0024 | EE-CA-0303-9001
Alberts, Katherine A. (California)
EE-CA-0303-0024 | EE-CA-0303-9001
Boutrous, Theodore J. Jr. (California)
EE-CA-0303-0002 | EE-CA-0303-0015 | EE-CA-0303-0017 | EE-CA-0303-0018 | EE-CA-0303-0020 | EE-CA-0303-0021 | EE-CA-0303-0022 | EE-CA-0303-9001
Brass, Rachel (California)
EE-CA-0303-0017 | EE-CA-0303-0018 | EE-CA-0303-9001
Catlett, Steven T. (Illinois)
EE-CA-0303-0024 | EE-CA-0303-9001
Dacre, Catherine M. (California)
EE-CA-0303-0024 | EE-CA-0303-9001
DeCamp, Paul (California)
EE-CA-0303-0015
Diekmann, Gilmore F. Jr. (California)
EE-CA-0303-0024 | EE-CA-0303-9001
DiNardo, Lawrence C. (Illinois)
EE-CA-0303-0024 | EE-CA-0303-9001
Dodge Byrnes, Jaime (California)
EE-CA-0303-9001
Edwards, John W. (California)
EE-CA-0303-0024 | EE-CA-0303-9001
Grossman, Paul (District of Columbia)
EE-CA-0303-0015 | EE-CA-0303-0020
Huibonhoa, Katherine C. (California)
EE-CA-0303-0020 | EE-CA-0303-0023 | EE-CA-0303-0024 | EE-CA-0303-9001
Johnson, Barbara L (District of Columbia)
EE-CA-0303-0020 | EE-CA-0303-0023 | EE-CA-0303-0024 | EE-CA-0303-9001 | EE-CA-0303-9001
Lees, Gail E. (California)
EE-CA-0303-0015 | EE-CA-0303-0020
Mollen, Neal D. (District of Columbia)
EE-CA-0303-0020 | EE-CA-0303-0023 | EE-CA-0303-0024 | EE-CA-0303-9001
Olson, Theodore B. (District of Columbia)
EE-CA-0303-0017 | EE-CA-0303-0018
Perry, Mark A. (District of Columbia)
EE-CA-0303-0015 | EE-CA-0303-0017 | EE-CA-0303-0018 | EE-CA-0303-0020 | EE-CA-0303-9001
Rose, Araanda M. (California)
EE-CA-0303-0015
Simerly, Janine Syll (California)
EE-CA-0303-0024 | EE-CA-0303-9001
Strauch, John L. (Illinois)
EE-CA-0303-0024 | EE-CA-0303-9001
Tayrani, Amir Cameron (District of Columbia)
EE-CA-0303-0017 | EE-CA-0303-0018
Other Lawyers Barker, Vicky L. (California)
EE-CA-0303-0009
Barton, Mark E. (California)
EE-CA-0303-0020
Beck, James (Pennsylvania)
EE-CA-0303-0002
Becker, Evelyn L. (District of Columbia)
EE-CA-0303-0020 | EE-CA-0303-0022
Beisner, John (District of Columbia)
EE-CA-0303-0002 | EE-CA-0303-0020
Berkman, Richard L. (Pennsylvania)
EE-CA-0303-0020
Berman, Jeffrey A (California)
EE-CA-0303-0020 | EE-CA-0303-0022
Blackwood, Vincent J. (District of Columbia)
EE-CA-0303-0016
Bloch, Adrienne L. (California)
EE-CA-0303-0010 | EE-CA-0303-0011
Bogue, Maureen K. (California)
EE-CA-0303-0020
Bruce, David R. (California)
EE-CA-0303-0002 | EE-CA-0303-0020
Burton, Mark Etheredge (California)
EE-CA-0303-0002
Coukos, Pamela (District of Columbia)
EE-CA-0303-0002
Farrell, Sandi (District of Columbia)
EE-CA-0303-0020
Fay, Raymond C. (District of Columbia)
EE-CA-0303-0020
Fentonmiller, Laura C. (District of Columbia)
EE-CA-0303-0002
Foreman, Michael L. (District of Columbia)
EE-CA-0303-0020 | EE-CA-0303-0022
Green, Jennifer (New York)
EE-CA-0303-0010 | EE-CA-0303-0011
Hillebrand, Gail (California)
EE-CA-0303-0010
Kohrman, Daniel B. (District of Columbia)
EE-CA-0303-0002 | EE-CA-0303-0009 | EE-CA-0303-0020 | EE-CA-0303-0022
Krischer, Joel E. (California)
EE-CA-0303-0002 | EE-CA-0303-0020
Lee, James L. (District of Columbia)
EE-CA-0303-0016
Lee, Bill Lann (California)
EE-CA-0303-0002 | EE-CA-0303-0010 | EE-CA-0303-0011 | EE-CA-0303-0020 | EE-CA-0303-0022
Popeo, Daniel J. (District of Columbia)
EE-CA-0303-0002
Radowitz, Melvin (District of Columbia)
EE-CA-0303-0009
Reesman, Ann Elizabeth (District of Columbia)
EE-CA-0303-0020 | EE-CA-0303-0022
Ross, Terri L. (New York)
EE-CA-0303-0020 | EE-CA-0303-0022
Rossman, Stuart T. (Massachusetts)
EE-CA-0303-0010 | EE-CA-0303-0011
Sagafi, Jahan C (California)
EE-CA-0303-0010
Samp, Richard A. (District of Columbia)
EE-CA-0303-0020 | EE-CA-0303-0022
Savage, Mark Randall (California)
EE-CA-0303-0011
Sloan, Barbara L. (District of Columbia)
EE-CA-0303-0002
Tirona, Marissa M. (California)
EE-CA-0303-0020 | EE-CA-0303-0022
Vann, Rae T. (District of Columbia)
EE-CA-0303-0002 | EE-CA-0303-0020
Whatley, Joe R. Jr. (New York)
EE-CA-0303-0002 | EE-CA-0303-0020
Wheeler, Carolyn L. (District of Columbia)
EE-CA-0303-0016
Wiggins, Audrey (District of Columbia)
EE-CA-0303-0002

- click to show/hide ALL -

new search
page permalink

- top of page -