Case: Karlo v. Pittsburgh Glass Works LLC.

2:10-cv-01283 | U.S. District Court for the Western District of Pennsylvania

Filed Date: Sept. 29, 2010

Closed Date: May 8, 2017

Clearinghouse coding complete

Case Summary

On September 29, 2010, a class of male employees 50 years of age or older filed a lawsuit in the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Pennsylvania against Pittsburgh Glass Works, LLC (“PGW”) under the Age Discrimination in Employment Act ("ADEA"), 29 U.S.C. § 621. The plaintiffs, represented by private counsel, asked the court for lost compensation in front pay and back pay, attorneys' fees and costs, declaratory and injunctive relief, lost pension benefits, and liquidated damages, claiming that they were abruptly terminated without explanation. Specifically, the plaintiffs claimed that their employment was terminated because of their age in violation of the ADEA. The case was assigned to Judge Nora Barry Fischer.

The plaintiffs first alleged that the termination of each of the named plaintiffs gave rise to an inference that PGW terminated them because of their age. Second, that PGW's process of selecting employees for termination applied seemingly facially neutral selection criteria in a manner that produced a disparate impact on older workers. Finally, they alleged that PGW unlawfully retaliated against employees who opposed the policies and procedures and filed complaints with the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission.

PGW filed a counterclaim, alleging that the plaintiffs breached the Separation Agreements and Releases they signed upon termination of their employment by bringing this suit. In November, PGW moved to dismiss the retaliation claim for failure to state a claim because the plaintiffs were subcontractors, not direct employees of PGW, at the time of the alleged retaliation. The following month, the plaintiffs moved to dismiss PGW’s counterclaim for breach of contract, alleging that the ADEA waiver in its releases was invalid and unenforceable.

On February 8, 2011, the court denied PGW's motion to dismiss, and a week later the plaintiffs filed an amended complaint, adding additional detail but otherwise matching the substance of the initial complaint. The following month, on March 1, PGW moved to dismiss part of the plaintiffs' amended complaint. Later that month, on March 23, the court denied both the plaintiffs' and PGW's motions to dismiss.

In October of 2011, the plaintiffs moved for leave to file a second amended complaint and motion for class certification. On October 31, Judge Fischer denied the plaintiffs leave to file a second amended complaint, reasoning that they had not exercised due diligence in seeking the discovery they claimed was critical to their amendment. In November 2011, PGW moved for summary judgment.

On May 9, 2012, Judge Fischer granted in part the plaintiffs' motion for conditional certification of their collective class as all “employees who were, at any time from on or about March 31, 2009:

50 years of age or older;
Who was employed by PGW;
A member of the salaried workforce; and
Terminated from employment with PGW by the RIF [Reduction in Force] implemented on March 31, 2009.” 880 F.Supp.2d 629

On July 20, 2012, the Court denied PGW’s motion to certify the question of the class certification for interlocutory appeal because the court's decision regarding certification was merely conditional and therefore not a final ruling. 2012 WL 2975400 The parties continued discovery and plaintiffs were added and removed from the case. On March 18, 2013, the plaintiffs again moved for leave to file a second amended complaint. The court denied the plaintiffs' motion without prejudice while the parties pursued a settlement conference with Judge Arthur Schwab.

In June 2013, Judge Fischer recused herself pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 455 for reasons unknown to the Clearinghouse and Judge Terrence F. McVerry began presiding over the case. Through the next year the parties argued over expert witnesses and some plaintiffs dropped their claims.

On March 31, 2014, Judge McVerry concluded that decertification was appropriate. The court found that the nine remaining plaintiffs were not similarly situated, as they held different titles and duties in different divisions and locations. The opt-in plaintiffs were therefore dismissed without prejudice, but the five representative plaintiffs’ claims survived. Judge McVerry also granted the plaintiffs' motion for leave to amend their complaint, as long as they didn’t expand the scope of the litigation. 2014 WL 1317595. On April 21, 2014, the plaintiffs filed their second amended complaint adding facts developed in discovery, narrowing the focus of their claims, and making miscellaneous stylistic and organizational revisions.

The plaintiffs moved for an interlocutory appeal on the decertification but were denied. The parties continued to debate expert testimony and motions for summary judgment. On June 8, 2015, Judge McVerry denied the plaintiffs' motion for leave to supplement with a new declaration as untimely. The next month, Judge McVerry granted three of PGW’s motions to bar expert testimony, finding unreliable methodology and opinion. Judge McVerry limited one of the plaintiffs' experts to rebuttal of three of PGW’s experts. 2015 WL 4232600.

On September 2, 2015, Judge McVerry granted PGW’s motion for summary judgment on the plaintiffs' individual disparate treatment claims and individual disparate impact claims, but denied summary judgment on the retaliation claims. Judge McVerry did not find disparate treatment, as the plaintiffs did not show that PGW retained a similarly situated employee who was sufficiently younger. The court, in granting summary judgment to PGW on the disparate impact claim, also found that the plaintiffs failed to show that a specific practice caused observable statistical differences affecting a protected class. Judge McVerry noted that the plaintiffs' purported statistical expert did not survive a Daubert challenge and was barred from testifying at trial, preventing the plaintiffs from making a statistical showing. The court further found that making such a showing would require recognition of an over-fifty-years-old subgroup, which was not cognizable under the ADEA given existing precedent. However, Judge McVerry found that the retaliation claims were for a jury to decide. 2015 WL 5156913.

After the court issued its opinion, the plaintiffs moved for a certification of final judgment, which would allow them to appeal the lower court's decision on summary judgment, and asked the court to stay further district court proceedings pending appeal. On October 2, 2015, Judge McVerry granted the plaintiffs’ motion for certification of final judgment, but declined to stay proceedings pending resolution of the appeal. 2015 WL 5782062. The plaintiffs appealed the grant of summary judgment in favor of the defendants to the Third Circuit on October 7, 2015. After the grant of summary judgment, PGW filed a bill of costs with the district court asking the plaintiffs to pay more than $60,000 in discovery costs. The district court opted to take no action on the bill of costs pending disposition of the appeal.

On October 16, 2015, Judge McVerry granted PGW’s motion for separate trials on the plaintiffs’ retaliation claims, expressing concern that the jury might be confused by the calling of different witnesses and the different facts in the cases.

One plaintiff's jury trial was held January 19 – 22, 2016. The jury found in favor of the plaintiff in the amount of $922,060. For reasons unknown to the Clearinghouse, the other remaining plaintiff stipulated to dismissal of his claims on February 16, 2016.

Following the trial, PGW filed a motion for judgment as a matter of law, to alter or amend judgment, and for a new trial. Judge McVerry denied all three of PGW's requests on May 18, 2016. The court denied the judgment as a matter of law because it agreed with the credibility determinations made and the reasonable inferences drawn by the jury in reaching its verdict. PGW asked that its damages be amended, but the court found PGW's explanations of miscalculations hardly more than guesswork fueled by its dissatisfaction with the verdict. PGW's argument for amendment regarding the plaintiff's duration of employment ignored the plaintiff's expert's explanation of possible earning scenarios. PGW's last amendment challenged the finding of their willful discriminatory conduct, but the court pointed out that the jury made a credibility determination. PGW moved for a new trial alleging many instances of improper behavior by plaintiff's counsel. The court said that it corrected the improper behavior when it happened and there wasn't enough to require a new trial.

On January 10, 2017, the Third Circuit ruled on the plaintiffs’ October 7, 2015 appeal of summary judgment. The Court of Appeals held that:

ADEA disparate impact claims are not limited to 40-and-older comparisons, and can be based on subgroups;
the district court abused its discretion in excluding testimony of the plaintiffs' statistics expert on grounds that he used facts or data that were not reliable;
remand for Daubert proceedings was required after finding a potential methodological flaw to determine whether the expert's report rested on good grounds;
the testimony of the plaintiffs' expert on human resources practices lacked relevance to the case;
the district court did not abuse its discretion in excluding expert testimony regarding implicit age bias in "reductions in force" procedures for lack of fit; and
the district court did not clearly err in determining that the named plaintiffs were not similarly situated to the opt-in plaintiffs. 849 F.3d 61.

On January 30, 2017, the case was reassigned to District Judge Mark R. Hornak. In light of the Third Circuit's ruling that the plaintiffs' disparate impact claim did in fact fall under the ADEA, the remaining parties entered into a private settlement agreement. The terms of the agreement were not disclosed, and the parties jointly stipulated to dismissal, which was approved by the court on May 8, 2017. The case is now closed.

show full summary

Summary Authors

Christianna Kyriacou (11/22/2013)

Raul Noguera-McElroy (3/3/2019)

Zoe Van Dyke (11/1/2022)

People

For PACER's information on parties and their attorneys, see: https://www.courtlistener.com/docket/5098008/parties/karlo-v-pittsburgh-glass-works-llc/

Judge(s)

Fischer, Nora Barry (Pennsylvania)

Attorney for Plaintiff

Evans, Melissa L. (Pennsylvania)

Attorney for Defendant

Atterberry, Rachel E. A. (Illinois)

Becker, David S. (Illinois)

Cottington, Robert B. (Pennsylvania)

Expert/Monitor/Master/Other

Judge(s)

Fischer, Nora Barry (Pennsylvania)

Hornak, Mark Raymond (Pennsylvania)

McVerry, Terrence F. (Pennsylvania)

Attorney for Plaintiff

Evans, Melissa L. (Pennsylvania)

Fischman, Mary Elizabeth (Pennsylvania)

Fox, Bruce C. (Pennsylvania)

Horowitz, Andrew J. (Pennsylvania)

Yang, Yuanyou (Pennsylvania)

Attorney for Defendant

Atterberry, Rachel E. A. (Illinois)

Becker, David S. (Illinois)

Cottington, Robert B. (Pennsylvania)

Fitzgerald, Jennifer L. (Illinois)

Heilman, Nancy L. (Pennsylvania)

Mayer, Jeffrey J. (Illinois)

Prorok, Robert F. (Pennsylvania)

Shapiro, John T. (Illinois)

Wills, Tina C. (Illinois)

Expert/Monitor/Master/Other

Myers, John J. (Pennsylvania)

Attorney Contact Information via CourtListener

show all people

Documents in the Clearinghouse

	Document
2:10-cv-01283	Docket [PACER]	May 9, 2017	May 9, 2017 Docket
1 2:10-cv-01283	Complaint Karlo v. Pittsburgh Glass Works	Sept. 29, 2010	Sept. 29, 2010 Complaint
9 2:10-cv-01283	Defendant Pittsburgh Glass Works' Motion to Dismiss Count III of the Complaint Karlo v. Pittsburgh Glass Works, LLC	Nov. 29, 2010	Nov. 29, 2010 Pleading / Motion / Brief
24 2:10-cv-01283	Plaintiffs' Motion to Dismiss Defendant's Counterclaim [Doc. 8] Karlo v. Pittsburgh Glass Works, LLC	Dec. 22, 2010	Dec. 22, 2010 Pleading / Motion / Brief
54 2:10-cv-01283	Amended Complaint Karlo v. Pittsburgh Glass Works	Feb. 15, 2011	Feb. 15, 2011 Complaint
59 2:10-cv-01283	Defendant Pittsburgh Glass Works' Motion to Dismiss Count III of Plaintiffs' First Amended Complaint Karlo v. Pittsburgh Glass Works, LLC	March 1, 2011	March 1, 2011 Pleading / Motion / Brief
98 2:10-cv-01283	Memorandum Opinion	Oct. 31, 2011	Oct. 31, 2011 Order/Opinion 2011 WL 2011
179 2:10-cv-01283	Memorandum Opinion Karlo v. Pittsburgh Glass Works, LLC	May 9, 2012	May 9, 2012 Order/Opinion 880 F.Supp.2d 880
179 2:10-cv-01283	Memorandum Opinion Karlo v. Pittsburgh Glass Works, LLC	May 9, 2012	May 9, 2012 Order/Opinion 880 F.Supp.2d 880
205 2:10-cv-01283	Memorandum Order Karlo v. Pittsburgh Glass Works, LLC	July 20, 2012	July 20, 2012 Order/Opinion 2012 WL 2012

show / hide documents

Docket

See docket on RECAP: https://www.courtlistener.com/docket/5098008/karlo-v-pittsburgh-glass-works-llc/

Last updated March 18, 2024, 3:04 a.m.

ECF Number	Description	Date	Link Date / Link
1	COMPLAINT against PITTSBURGH GLASS WORKS, LLC (Filing fee $350, receipt number 0315-1737355), filed by BENJAMIN D. THOMPSON, MARK K. MCLURE, JEFFREY MARIETTI, DAVID MEIXELSBERGER, RUDOLPH A. KARLO, RICHARD CSUKAS, WILLIAM S. CUNNINGHAM. (Attachments: # 1 Civil Cover Sheet, # 2 Summons as to Pittsburgh Glass Works, LLC, # 3 Exhibit A, # 4 Exhibit B, # 5 Exhibit C) (jv) (Entered: 09/30/2010) 1 Civil Cover Sheet View on PACER 2 Summons as to Pittsburgh Glass Works, LLC View on PACER 3 Exhibit A View on PACER 4 Exhibit B View on PACER 5 Exhibit C View on PACER	Sept. 29, 2010	Sept. 29, 2010 Clearinghouse
	Summons Issued as to PITTSBURGH GLASS WORKS, LLC (jv)	Sept. 30, 2010	Sept. 30, 2010 PACER
2	NOTICE that instant civil action has been designated for placement into the United States District Court's Alternative Dispute Resolution program. Parties are directed to fully complete the required 26(f) report, which includes the stipulation of selecting an ADR process. Counsel for plaintiff (or in the case of a removal action, counsel for removing defendant) shall make service of the notice on all parties. (jg, ) (Entered: 09/30/2010)	Sept. 30, 2010	Sept. 30, 2010 PACER
3	NOTICE of Appearance by Melissa L. Evans on behalf of RICHARD CSUKAS, WILLIAM S. CUNNINGHAM, RUDOLPH A. KARLO, JEFFREY MARIETTI, MARK K. MCLURE, DAVID MEIXELSBERGER, BENJAMIN D. THOMPSON. (Evans, Melissa) (Entered: 09/30/2010)	Sept. 30, 2010	Sept. 30, 2010 PACER
4	SUMMONS/Return of Service Returned Executed by BENJAMIN D. THOMPSON, MARK K. MCLURE, JEFFREY MARIETTI, DAVID MEIXELSBERGER, RUDOLPH A. KARLO, RICHARD CSUKAS, WILLIAM S. CUNNINGHAM. PITTSBURGH GLASS WORKS, LLC served on 10/6/2010, answer due 10/27/2010. (Evans, Melissa) (Entered: 10/08/2010)	Oct. 8, 2010	Oct. 8, 2010 PACER
5	NOTICE of Appearance by Robert B. Cottington on behalf of PITTSBURGH GLASS WORKS, LLC. (Cottington, Robert) (Entered: 10/22/2010)	Oct. 22, 2010	Oct. 22, 2010 PACER
6	NOTICE of Appearance by Nancy L. Heilman on behalf of PITTSBURGH GLASS WORKS, LLC. (Heilman, Nancy) (Entered: 10/22/2010)	Oct. 22, 2010	Oct. 22, 2010 PACER
7	Stipulation for Extension of Time to Answer by BENJAMIN D. THOMPSON, MARK K. MCLURE, JEFFREY MARIETTI, DAVID MEIXELSBERGER, PITTSBURGH GLASS WORKS, LLC, RUDOLPH A. KARLO, RICHARD CSUKAS, WILLIAM S. CUNNINGHAM Answer due from PITTSBURGH GLASS WORKS, LLC on 11/29/2010. (Heilman, Nancy) (Entered: 10/26/2010)	Oct. 26, 2010	Oct. 26, 2010 PACER
8	ANSWER to 1 Complaint, Affirmative Defenses, COUNTERCLAIM against All Plaintiffs by PITTSBURGH GLASS WORKS, LLC. (Cottington, Robert) (Entered: 11/29/2010)	Nov. 29, 2010	Nov. 29, 2010 Clearinghouse
9	MOTION to Dismiss Count III re 1 Complaint, by PITTSBURGH GLASS WORKS, LLC. (Cottington, Robert) (Entered: 11/29/2010)	Nov. 29, 2010	Nov. 29, 2010 Clearinghouse
10	BRIEF in Support re 9 Motion to Dismiss Count III filed by PITTSBURGH GLASS WORKS, LLC. (Cottington, Robert) (Entered: 11/29/2010)	Nov. 29, 2010	Nov. 29, 2010 PACER
11	ORDER ON MOTIONS PRACTICE (details more fully stated within said Order). Signed by Judge Nora Barry Fischer on 11/29/10. (jg) (Entered: 11/30/2010)	Nov. 29, 2010	Nov. 29, 2010 PACER
	CLERK'S OFFICE QUALITY CONTROL MESSAGE re 9 Motion to Dismiss. ERROR: Proposed Order was not attached. CORRECTION: Attorney is advised to file a proposed order by using the Proposed Order event and linking it to 9 Motion to Dismiss. This message is for informational purposes only. (jv)	Nov. 30, 2010	Nov. 30, 2010 PACER
12	MOTION for attorney David S. Becker to Appear Pro Hac Vice, (Filing fee $40, Receipt # 0315-1795555) by PITTSBURGH GLASS WORKS, LLC. (Attachments: # 1 Proposed Order) (Cottington, Robert) (Entered: 11/30/2010) 1 Proposed Order View on PACER	Nov. 30, 2010	Nov. 30, 2010 PACER
13	ORDER granting 12 Motion for David S. Becker, Esquire to Appear Pro Hac Vice on behalf of Defendant Pittsburgh Glass Works, LLC. Signed by Judge Nora Barry Fischer on 11/30/10. (jg) (Entered: 11/30/2010)	Nov. 30, 2010	Nov. 30, 2010 PACER
	CLERK'S OFFICE QUALITY CONTROL MESSAGE re 12 Motion to Appear Pro Hac Vice, 9 Motion to Dismiss, 8 Answer to Complaint, Counterclaim. ERROR: Party did not file disclosure statement as required pursuant L.R. 7.1.1. CORRECTION: Attorney advised to file statement within 7 days. This message is for informational purposes only. Disclosure Statement due by 12/8/2010. (jv)	Dec. 1, 2010	Dec. 1, 2010 PACER
14	Proposed Order re 9 Motion to Dismiss Count III of Plaintiffs' Complaint by PITTSBURGH GLASS WORKS, LLC. (Becker, David) (Entered: 12/01/2010)	Dec. 1, 2010	Dec. 1, 2010 PACER
15	MOTION for attorney John T. Shapiro to Appear Pro Hac Vice, (Filing fee $40, Receipt # 0315-1798626) by PITTSBURGH GLASS WORKS, LLC. (Attachments: # 1 Proposed Order) (Cottington, Robert) (Entered: 12/02/2010) 1 Proposed Order View on PACER	Dec. 2, 2010	Dec. 2, 2010 PACER
16	MOTION for attorney Jeffrey J. Mayer to Appear Pro Hac Vice, (Filing fee $40, Receipt # 0315-1798637) by PITTSBURGH GLASS WORKS, LLC. (Attachments: # 1 Proposed Order) (Cottington, Robert) (Entered: 12/02/2010) 1 Proposed Order View on PACER	Dec. 2, 2010	Dec. 2, 2010 PACER
17	MOTION for attorney Jennifer L. Fitzgerald to Appear Pro Hac Vice, (Filing fee $40, Receipt # 0315-1798646) by PITTSBURGH GLASS WORKS, LLC. (Attachments: # 1 Proposed Order) (Cottington, Robert) (Entered: 12/02/2010) 1 Proposed Order View on PACER	Dec. 2, 2010	Dec. 2, 2010 PACER
18	ORDER granting 15 Motion for John T. Shapiro, Esquire to Appear Pro Hac Vice for Defendant Pittsburgh Glass Works, LLC. Signed by Judge Nora Barry Fischer on 12/2/10. (jg) (Entered: 12/02/2010)	Dec. 2, 2010	Dec. 2, 2010 PACER
19	ORDER granting 17 Motion for Jennifer L. Fitzgerald, Esquire to Appear Pro Hac Vice for Defendant Pittsburgh Glass Works, LLC. Signed by Judge Nora Barry Fischer on 12/2/10. (jg) (Entered: 12/02/2010)	Dec. 2, 2010	Dec. 2, 2010 PACER
20	ORDER granting 16 Motion for Jeffrey J. Mayer, Esquire to Appear Pro Hac Vice for Defendant Pittsburgh Glass Works, LLC. Signed by Judge Nora Barry Fischer on 12/2/10. (jg) (Entered: 12/02/2010)	Dec. 2, 2010	Dec. 2, 2010 PACER
21	Disclosure Statement identifying GE Capital Holdings, Inc. PPG Industries, Inc. by PITTSBURGH GLASS WORKS, LLC. (Becker, David) Modified on 12/3/2010. (jv) (Entered: 12/02/2010)	Dec. 2, 2010	Dec. 2, 2010 PACER
22	MOTION for Extension of Time to File Response/Reply as to 9 MOTION to Dismiss Count III re 1 Complaint, 10 Brief in Support of Motion, 14 Proposed Order STIPULATED Motion for Extension of Time by RICHARD CSUKAS, WILLIAM S. CUNNINGHAM, RUDOLPH A. KARLO, JEFFREY MARIETTI, MARK K. MCLURE, DAVID MEIXELSBERGER, BENJAMIN D. THOMPSON. (Attachments: # 1 Proposed Order) (Evans, Melissa) (Entered: 12/15/2010) 1 Proposed Order View on PACER	Dec. 15, 2010	Dec. 15, 2010 PACER
23	ORDER granting 22 Plaintiffs' Motion for Extension of Time to File Response/Reply as to 9 Motion to Dismiss Count III re 1 Complaint; Plaintiffs shaIl file their response to said Motion to Dismiss on or before 1/12/11. Signed by Judge Nora Barry Fischer on 12/16/10. (jg) (Entered: 12/16/2010)	Dec. 16, 2010	Dec. 16, 2010 PACER
24	MOTION to Dismiss Defendant's Counterclaim re 8 Answer to Complaint, Counterclaim by RICHARD CSUKAS, WILLIAM S. CUNNINGHAM, RUDOLPH A. KARLO, JEFFREY MARIETTI, MARK K. MCLURE, DAVID MEIXELSBERGER, BENJAMIN D. THOMPSON. (Attachments: # 1 Proposed Order) (Evans, Melissa) (Entered: 12/22/2010) 1 Proposed Order View on PACER	Dec. 22, 2010	Dec. 22, 2010 Clearinghouse
25	BRIEF in Support re 24 Motion to Dismiss, Defendant's Counterclaim filed by RICHARD CSUKAS, WILLIAM S. CUNNINGHAM, RUDOLPH A. KARLO, JEFFREY MARIETTI, MARK K. MCLURE, DAVID MEIXELSBERGER, BENJAMIN D. THOMPSON. (Evans, Melissa) (Entered: 12/22/2010)	Dec. 22, 2010	Dec. 22, 2010 PACER
26	MOTION to Strike 8 Answer to Complaint, Counterclaim Affirmative Defenses by RICHARD CSUKAS, WILLIAM S. CUNNINGHAM, RUDOLPH A. KARLO, JEFFREY MARIETTI, MARK K. MCLURE, DAVID MEIXELSBERGER, BENJAMIN D. THOMPSON. (Attachments: # 1 Proposed Order) (Evans, Melissa) (Entered: 12/22/2010) 1 Proposed Order View on Clearinghouse	Dec. 22, 2010	Dec. 22, 2010 PACER
27	BRIEF in Support re 26 Motion to Strike, Affirmative Defenses filed by RICHARD CSUKAS, WILLIAM S. CUNNINGHAM, RUDOLPH A. KARLO, JEFFREY MARIETTI, MARK K. MCLURE, DAVID MEIXELSBERGER, BENJAMIN D. THOMPSON. (Evans, Melissa) (Entered: 12/22/2010)	Dec. 22, 2010	Dec. 22, 2010 PACER
28	Consent MOTION for Extension of Time to File Response/Reply as to 24 MOTION to Dismiss Defendant's Counterclaim re 8 Answer to Complaint, Counterclaim MOTION to Dismiss Defendant's Counterclaim re 8 Answer to Complaint, Counterclaim, 26 MOTION to Strike 8 Answer to Complaint, Counterclaim Affirmative Defenses MOTION to Strike 8 Answer to Complaint, Counterclaim Affirmative Defenses by PITTSBURGH GLASS WORKS, LLC. (Becker, David) (Entered: 01/11/2011)	Jan. 11, 2011	Jan. 11, 2011 PACER
29	Proposed Order re 28 Motion for Extension of Time to File Response/Reply, by PITTSBURGH GLASS WORKS, LLC. (Becker, David) (Entered: 01/11/2011)	Jan. 11, 2011	Jan. 11, 2011 PACER
	ORDER granting 28 Defendant's Response to 24 Plaintiffs' Motion to Dismiss Counterclaim and 26 Plaintiffs' Motin to Strike Defendant's Affirmative Defenses; Said Responses shall be be filed by Defendant by no later than 1/24/11. Ordered by Judge Nora Barry Fischer on 1/11/11. Text-only entry; no PDF document will issue. This text-only entry constitutes the Order of the Court or Notice on the matter. (jg)	Jan. 11, 2011	Jan. 11, 2011 PACER
30	MEMORANDUM ORDER indicating that the parties' Rule 26 Meeting Report and Stipulation Selecting ADR Process due by 1/27/2011; A Motion Hearing (on all pending Motions)/Case Management Conference is set for 2/3/2011 at 9:30 AM in Courtroom 5B before Nora Barry Fischer. Signed by Judge Nora Barry Fischer on 1/12/11. (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit A, # 2 Exhibit B) (jg) (Entered: 01/12/2011) 1 Exhibit A View on PACER 2 Exhibit B View on PACER	Jan. 12, 2011	Jan. 12, 2011 PACER
31	RESPONSE IN OPPOSITION to 9 Motion to Dismiss, 10 Brief in Support of Motion, filed by MARK K. MCLURE. (Attachments: # 1 Proposed Order) (Evans, Melissa) Modified to remove from public view since court filed correctly as 32 BRIEF in Opposition re 9 Motion to Dismiss on 1/13/2011. (jv) (Entered: 01/12/2011)	Jan. 12, 2011	Jan. 12, 2011 PACER
32	BRIEF in Opposition re 9 Motion to Dismiss filed by MARK K. MCLURE. (Attachment(s): # 1 Proposed Order) (jv). (Entered: 01/13/2011) 1 Proposed Order View on PACER	Jan. 12, 2011	Jan. 12, 2011 PACER
	CLERK'S OFFICE QUALITY CONTROL MESSAGE re 31 Response in Opposition. ERROR: Wrong event selected. CORRECTION: Removed from public view and Re-docketed as 32 BRIEF in Opposition re 9 Motion to Dismiss. This message is for informational purposes only. (jv)	Jan. 13, 2011	Jan. 13, 2011 PACER
33	BRIEF in Opposition re 24 Motion to Dismiss, filed by PITTSBURGH GLASS WORKS, LLC. (Becker, David) Modified on 1/25/2011. (jv, ) (Entered: 01/24/2011)	Jan. 24, 2011	Jan. 24, 2011 PACER
34	BRIEF in Opposition re 26 Motion to Strike, filed by PITTSBURGH GLASS WORKS, LLC. (Becker, David) (Entered: 01/24/2011)	Jan. 24, 2011	Jan. 24, 2011 PACER
35	Proposed Order re 24 Motion to Dismiss, by PITTSBURGH GLASS WORKS, LLC. (Becker, David) (Entered: 01/24/2011)	Jan. 24, 2011	Jan. 24, 2011 PACER
36	Proposed Order re 26 Motion to Strike, by PITTSBURGH GLASS WORKS, LLC. (Becker, David) (Entered: 01/24/2011)	Jan. 24, 2011	Jan. 24, 2011 PACER
37	Errata re 33 Brief in Opposition to Motion, 35 Proposed Order by PITTSBURGH GLASS WORKS, LLC. Reason for Correction: Original Filing Improperly Titled a "Response". (Attachments: # 1 Proposed Order) (Becker, David) (Entered: 01/25/2011) 1 Proposed Order View on PACER	Jan. 25, 2011	Jan. 25, 2011 PACER
38	Errata re 36 Proposed Order, 34 Brief in Opposition to Motion by PITTSBURGH GLASS WORKS, LLC. Reason for Correction: Original Filing Improperly Titled a Response. (Attachments: # 1 Proposed Order) (Becker, David) (Entered: 01/25/2011) 1 Proposed Order View on PACER	Jan. 25, 2011	Jan. 25, 2011 PACER
39	REPORT of Rule 26(f) Planning Meeting. (Mayer, Jeffrey) (Entered: 01/27/2011)	Jan. 27, 2011	Jan. 27, 2011 PACER
40	STIPULATION selecting ADR process by RICHARD CSUKAS, WILLIAM S. CUNNINGHAM, RUDOLPH A. KARLO, JEFFREY MARIETTI, MARK K. MCLURE, DAVID MEIXELSBERGER, PITTSBURGH GLASS WORKS, LLC, BENJAMIN D. THOMPSON (Fox, Bruce) (Entered: 01/28/2011)	Jan. 28, 2011	Jan. 28, 2011 PACER
	CLERK'S OFFICE QUALITY CONTROL MESSAGE re 39 Report of Rule 26(f) Planning Meeting. ERROR: Typed name omitted by s/. CORRECTION: Attorney advised of signature requirements. Attorney to resubmit with signature, using ERRATA event (Locatdd under "Other documents"). Attorney also advised to link ERRATA event to 39 Report of Rule 6(f) Plannning Meeting. This message is for informational purposes only. (jv)	Jan. 28, 2011	Jan. 28, 2011 PACER
41	Errata re 39 Report of Rule 26(f) Planning Meeting by PITTSBURGH GLASS WORKS, LLC. Reason for Correction: Defective electronic signature. (Mayer, Jeffrey) (Entered: 01/28/2011)	Jan. 28, 2011	Jan. 28, 2011 PACER
42	REPLY BRIEF by PITTSBURGH GLASS WORKS, LLC re 9 Motion to Dismiss Count III of Plaintiffs' Complaint filed by PITTSBURGH GLASS WORKS, LLC. (Becker, David) (Entered: 01/31/2011)	Jan. 31, 2011	Jan. 31, 2011 PACER
43	MOTION to Continue February 3, 2011 Case Management Conference and Arguments on Pending Motions by PITTSBURGH GLASS WORKS, LLC. (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit A, # 2 Proposed Order) (Becker, David) (Entered: 01/31/2011) 1 Exhibit A View on PACER 2 Proposed Order View on PACER	Jan. 31, 2011	Jan. 31, 2011 PACER
44	ORDER granting 43 Motion to Continue 2/3/11 2011 Case Management Conference and Arguments on Pending Motions filed by PITTSBURGH GLASS WORKS, LLC; that the Case Management/Motion Hearing set for 2/3/11 is re-set for 2/7/2011 at 10:30 AM in Courtroom 5B before Judge Nora Barry Fischer. Signed by Judge Nora Barry Fischer on 2/1/11. (jg) (Entered: 02/01/2011)	Feb. 1, 2011	Feb. 1, 2011 PACER
45	NOTICE of Appearance by Robert F. Prorok on behalf of PITTSBURGH GLASS WORKS, LLC. (Prorok, Robert) (Entered: 02/04/2011)	Feb. 4, 2011	Feb. 4, 2011 PACER
46	Minute Entry for proceedings held before Judge Nora Barry Fischer: Motion Hearing held on 2/7/2011 re 9 MOTION to Dismiss Count III indicating that the Court held oral arguments on a motion to dismiss brought by Defendant and Plaintiffs' response thereto. After oral argument, the parties and court agreed that in the interest of justice, Plaintiffs should proceed with the filing of an amended complaint. To that end, Plaintiffs shall file an amended complaint on or before 2/15/11 by 5:00 p.m. Defendants response to said amended complaint is due to the Court on or before 3/1/11 on or before 5:00 pm. The Court held in abeyance argument related to Plaintiffs' motion to dismiss and motion to strike as they are not completely briefed. In light of same, the Court will conduct a status conference on 3/3/11 at 11:00 a.m. by phone as it relates to Plaintiffs' amended complaint and Defendant's pending motions, at which time a further briefing schedule and oral argument will be scheduled. The parties did not request a transcript, hence none was ordered. An appropriate order follows. (Court Reporter: K. Earley) (jg) Modified on 2/8/2011. (jg, ) (Entered: 02/08/2011)	Feb. 7, 2011	Feb. 7, 2011 PACER
47	Minute Entry for proceedings held before Judge Nora Barry Fischer: Case Management Conference held on 2/7/2011 indicating that counsel for Plaintiffs provided the Court with information concerning the background of the seven Plaintiffs and also answered the Courts questions regarding the nature of the action; potential number of witnesses in addition to describing in general various documents which may be pertinent. The Court reviewed with the parties their 26(f) reports in detail and particularly the description of documents and individuals encompassed by fact discovery. Although in many areas the parties have agreements, many areas may require the Courts intervention. The Court also reminded parties of their duty to disclose both hard copy and electronic documents. Initial disclosures must be made by 3/3/11 by 5:00 p.m. Because of disagreements concerning the course of discovery, the Court orders that counsel provide the Court with proposed orders by 3/18/11 at 5:00 p.m. For good cause shown, the Court enlarges the limitations of discovery on both depositions and interrogatories. Counsel will supplement their Rule 26(f) reports by 4/4/11 by 5:00 p.m. Counsel will also submit a proposed protective order by said date. The Court will conduct periodic discovery status conferences, the first of which will occur on 4/5/11 at 10:00 a.m. EST, the Court to initiate the call. Following the case management conference, counsel for the parties continued their discussion concerning the case. Court orders to follow. (Court Reporter: None) (jg) (Entered: 02/08/2011)	Feb. 7, 2011	Feb. 7, 2011 PACER
48	ORDER indicating that upon consideration of the parties' oral argument on Defendant's motion to dismiss Count III of Plaintiffs' complaint 9, it is hereby ordered that Defendant's motion to dismiss is denied, without prejudice. Plaintiffs shall file an amended complaint on or before 2/15/11 at 5:00 p.m. Defendant shall file its response on or before 3/1/11 at 5:00 p.m. Signed by Judge Nora Barry Fischer on 2/8/11. (jg) (Entered: 02/08/2011)	Feb. 8, 2011	Feb. 8, 2011 Clearinghouse
49	ORDER indicating that after discussion with Plaintiffs and Defendants counsel on the nature and scope of discovery during the case management conference held on 2/7/11, wherein certain disagreements became apparent between counsel as to the nature and extent of discovery given Plaintiffs characterization of the action as both an individual action and collective action and Defendants denial of same, it is hereby ordered that counsel for both parties provide the Court with their respective proposed orders to govern discovery by 3/18/11 at 5:00 p.m. Counsel shall also supplement their Rule 26(f) reports as to electronic discovery and submit a proposed agreed upon protective order by 4/4/11 by 5:00 p.m. Signed by Judge Nora Barry Fischer on 2/8/11. (jg) (Entered: 02/08/2011)	Feb. 8, 2011	Feb. 8, 2011 PACER
50	REPLY BRIEF by RICHARD CSUKAS, WILLIAM S. CUNNINGHAM, RUDOLPH A. KARLO, JEFFREY MARIETTI, MARK K. MCLURE, DAVID MEIXELSBERGER, BENJAMIN D. THOMPSON re 24 Motion to Dismiss, 25 Brief in Support of Motion, 33 Brief in Opposition to Motion filed by RICHARD CSUKAS, WILLIAM S. CUNNINGHAM, RUDOLPH A. KARLO, JEFFREY MARIETTI, MARK K. MCLURE, DAVID MEIXELSBERGER, BENJAMIN D. THOMPSON. (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit Karlo Agreement, # 2 Exhibit McLure Agreement, # 3 Exhibit Cunningham Agreement, # 4 Exhibit Marietti Agreement, # 5 Exhibit Meixelsberger Agreement, # 6 Exhibit Thompson Agreement, # 7 Exhibit Csukas Agreement) (Evans, Melissa) (Entered: 02/10/2011) 1 Exhibit Karlo Agreement View on PACER 2 Exhibit McLure Agreement View on PACER 3 Exhibit Cunningham Agreement View on PACER 4 Exhibit Marietti Agreement View on PACER 5 Exhibit Meixelsberger Agreement View on PACER 6 Exhibit Thompson Agreement View on PACER 7 Exhibit Csukas Agreement View on PACER	Feb. 10, 2011	Feb. 10, 2011 PACER
51	MOTION for Leave to File Reply Brief on Plaintiffs' Motion to Strike by RICHARD CSUKAS, WILLIAM S. CUNNINGHAM, RUDOLPH A. KARLO, JEFFREY MARIETTI, MARK K. MCLURE, DAVID MEIXELSBERGER, BENJAMIN D. THOMPSON. (Attachments: # 1 Reply Brief, # 2 Proposed Order) (Evans, Melissa) (Entered: 02/10/2011) 1 Reply Brief View on PACER 2 Proposed Order View on PACER	Feb. 10, 2011	Feb. 10, 2011 PACER
52	ORDER granting 51 Plaintiffs' Motion for Leave to File Reply Brief on 26 Plaintiffs' Motion to Strike; Plaintiffs' Reply brief is due by 2/18/2011. Signed by Judge Nora Barry Fischer on 2/11/11. (jg) (Entered: 02/11/2011)	Feb. 11, 2011	Feb. 11, 2011 PACER
53	REPLY BRIEF by RICHARD CSUKAS, WILLIAM S. CUNNINGHAM, RUDOLPH A. KARLO, JEFFREY MARIETTI, MARK K. MCLURE, DAVID MEIXELSBERGER, BENJAMIN D. THOMPSON re 26 Motion to Strike, filed by RICHARD CSUKAS, WILLIAM S. CUNNINGHAM, RUDOLPH A. KARLO, JEFFREY MARIETTI, MARK K. MCLURE, DAVID MEIXELSBERGER, BENJAMIN D. THOMPSON. (Evans, Melissa) (Entered: 02/11/2011)	Feb. 11, 2011	Feb. 11, 2011 PACER
54	First AMENDED COMPLAINT against PITTSBURGH GLASS WORKS, LLC, filed by BENJAMIN D. THOMPSON, JEFFREY MARIETTI, WILLIAM S. CUNNINGHAM, RUDOLPH A. KARLO, RICHARD CSUKAS, MARK K. MCLURE, DAVID MEIXELSBERGER. (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit A, # 2 Exhibit B, # 3 Exhibit C, # 4 Exhibit D, # 5 Exhibit E, # 6 Exhibit F, # 7 Exhibit G, # 8 Exhibit H, # 9 Exhibit I, # 10 Exhibit J) (Evans, Melissa) (Entered: 02/15/2011) 1 Exhibit A View on PACER 2 Exhibit B View on PACER 3 Exhibit C View on PACER 4 Exhibit D View on PACER 5 Exhibit E View on PACER 6 Exhibit F View on PACER 7 Exhibit G View on PACER 8 Exhibit H View on PACER 9 Exhibit I View on PACER 10 Exhibit J View on PACER	Feb. 15, 2011	Feb. 15, 2011 Clearinghouse
55	MOTION for Leave to File Sur-Reply in Opposition to Plaintiffs' Motion to Dismiss Defendant's Counterclaim by PITTSBURGH GLASS WORKS, LLC. (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit A, # 2 Proposed Order) (Becker, David) (Entered: 02/18/2011) 1 Exhibit A View on PACER 2 Proposed Order View on PACER	Feb. 18, 2011	Feb. 18, 2011 PACER
56	ORDER granting 55 Motion for Leave to File Sur-Reply in Opposition to Plaintiffs' 24 Motion to Dismiss Defendant's Counterclaim; that Defendant's Sur-Reply shall be filed by 2/23/2011. Signed by Judge Nora Barry Fischer on 2/18/11. (jg) (Entered: 02/18/2011)	Feb. 18, 2011	Feb. 18, 2011 PACER
57	Sur-Reply Brief in Opposition to 24 Motion to Dismiss, filed by PITTSBURGH GLASS WORKS, LLC. (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit A) (Becker, David) (Entered: 02/18/2011) 1 Exhibit A View on PACER	Feb. 18, 2011	Feb. 18, 2011 PACER
58	STIPULATED PROTECTIVE ORDER by RICHARD CSUKAS, RICHARD CSUKAS, WILLIAM S. CUNNINGHAM, RUDOLPH A. KARLO, JEFFREY MARIETTI, MARK K. MCLURE, DAVID MEIXELSBERGER, PITTSBURGH GLASS WORKS, LLC, BENJAMIN D. THOMPSON. (Evans, Melissa) (Entered: 03/01/2011)	March 1, 2011	March 1, 2011 PACER
59	MOTION to Dismiss Count III re 54 Amended Complaint, by PITTSBURGH GLASS WORKS, LLC. (Attachments: # 1 Proposed Order) (Becker, David) (Entered: 03/01/2011) 1 Proposed Order View on Clearinghouse	March 1, 2011	March 1, 2011 Clearinghouse
60	BRIEF in Support re 59 Motion to Dismiss Count III of First Amended Complaint filed by PITTSBURGH GLASS WORKS, LLC. (Becker, David) (Entered: 03/01/2011)	March 1, 2011	March 1, 2011 PACER
61	PROTECTIVE ORDER (details more fully stated in said Order). Signed by Judge Nora Barry Fischer on 3/2/11. (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit A) (jg) (Entered: 03/02/2011) 1 Exhibit A View on PACER	March 2, 2011	March 2, 2011 PACER
	ORDER indicating that a Motion Hearing/Argument as to all pending Motions is scheduled for Wednesday, March 23, 2011 at 9:30 AM in Courtroom 5B before Judge Nora Barry Fischer. Ordered by Judge Nora Barry Fischer on 3/2/11. Text-only entry; no PDF document will issue. This text-only entry constitutes the Order of the Court or Notice on the matter. (jg)	March 2, 2011	March 2, 2011 PACER
62	Minute Entry for proceedings held before Judge Nora Barry Fischer: Telephonic Status Conference held on 3/3/2011 indicating that counsel for the parties advised the Court that the Motion Hearing/Argument set for 3/23/11 at 9:30 AM can proceed as scheduled. In light of same, the Court set the following briefing schedule relating to Defendant's Motion to Dismiss Count III of Plaintiffs First Amended Complaint (Docket No. 59 ): (1) Plaintiffs' response shall be filed by 3/10/11; (2) Defendant's reply, if any, shall be filed by 3/17/11; and (3) Plaintiffs' sur-reply, if any, shall be filed by 3/21/11. Additionally, for good cause shown, i.e., the death of an immediate family member, the Court enlarged the time period for the parties to make initial disclosures until 3/8/11 and further enlarged the time period for the parties to provide the Court with revised Rule 16 orders until 3/22/11. (Court Reporter: None) (jg) (Entered: 03/04/2011)	March 3, 2011	March 3, 2011 PACER
63	BRIEF IN OPPOSITION to 59 Motion to Dismiss, 60 Brief in Support of Motion, filed by RUDOLPH A. KARLO, MARK K. MCLURE. (Attachments: # 1 Proposed Order) (Evans, Melissa) (Entered: 03/10/2011) 1 Proposed Order View on PACER	March 10, 2011	March 10, 2011 PACER
64	REPLY BRIEF by PITTSBURGH GLASS WORKS, LLC re 59 Motion to Dismiss Count III of Plaintiffs' First Amended Collective Action Complaint filed by PITTSBURGH GLASS WORKS, LLC. (Becker, David) (Entered: 03/17/2011)	March 17, 2011	March 17, 2011 PACER
65	Sur-Reply in Opposition re 59 Motion to Dismiss, filed by RICHARD CSUKAS, RICHARD CSUKAS, WILLIAM S. CUNNINGHAM, RUDOLPH A. KARLO, JEFFREY MARIETTI, MARK K. MCLURE, DAVID MEIXELSBERGER, BENJAMIN D. THOMPSON. (Evans, Melissa) (Entered: 03/21/2011)	March 21, 2011	March 21, 2011 PACER
66	Proposed Order (Scheduling) by PITTSBURGH GLASS WORKS, LLC. (Cottington, Robert) (Entered: 03/22/2011)	March 22, 2011	March 22, 2011 PACER
67	Proposed Order on Discovery by RICHARD CSUKAS, RICHARD CSUKAS, WILLIAM S. CUNNINGHAM, RUDOLPH A. KARLO, JEFFREY MARIETTI, MARK K. MCLURE, DAVID MEIXELSBERGER, BENJAMIN D. THOMPSON. (Evans, Melissa) (Entered: 03/22/2011)	March 22, 2011	March 22, 2011 PACER
68	Minute Entry for proceedings held before Judge Nora Barry Fischer: Motion Hearing held on 3/23/2011 on Plaintiff's "Motion to Dismiss Defendant's Counterclaim," 24, Plaintiff's "Motion to Strike Certain of PGW's Affirmative Defenses," 26, and Defendant's "Motion to Dismiss Count III of Plaintiffs' First Amended Complaint," 59 . The Court denied said motions on the record. An appropriate Order follows. The Court acknowledged receipt of the parties' proposed scheduling orders, ( 66, 67 ). The parties then agreed to postpone discussion of same until the first periodic discovery status conference, which is presently set to occur on 4/5/11 at 10:00 a.m. EST. The Court will initiate the call. The Court also inquired concerning the status of disclosures and was advised that counsel are proceeding in that regard. At the request of the parties, the Court ordered the production of the transcript, with costs of said transcription to be borne equally by the parties. (Court Reporter: K. Earley) (jg) (Entered: 03/24/2011)	March 23, 2011	March 23, 2011 Clearinghouse
69	ORDER indicating that upon consideration of the parties; arguments, and for reasons stated on the record during the 3/23/11 hearing, it is hereby ordered that: 1. Defendant shall file its Amended Answer with Affirmative Defenses and Counterclaims by 4/14/11 at 5:00 p.m.; 2. Plaintiffs' Motion to Dismiss Defendant's Counterclaim 24 is denied, as moot, and without prejudice to Plaintiffs raising the issues set forth therein in a Motion for Summary Judgment at the conclusion of fact discovery upon Order of Court; 3. To the extent Plaintiff Benjamin D. Thompson, however, wishes to renew his motion to dismiss after the filing of Defendant's Amended Answer, said motion shall be filed by 4/28/11 at 5:00 p.m. Defendant's response to same, if any, shall be filed by 5/12/11 at 5:00 p.m.; 4. Plaintiffs' Motion to Strike 26 is denied, as moot. Moreover, based on the status of this case, including ongoing disclosures and argument of counsel pertinent to the facts underlying the affirmative defenses raised by Defendant, and the present state of the law in this District, the Court finds that Defendant's Affirmative Defenses, as stated in its "Answer, Affirmative Defenses and Counterclaim" 8, provide Plaintiffs with sufficient notice to prepare for and participate in discovery as well as to counter same; 5. Defendant's Motion to Dismiss 59 is denied without prejudice to Defendant raising the issues set forth therein in a Motion for Summary Judgment at the conclusion of fact discovery upon Order of Court. Signed by Judge Nora Barry Fischer on 3/24/11. (jg) (Entered: 03/24/2011)	March 24, 2011	March 24, 2011 PACER
	NOTICE of Hearing: The Discovery Status Conference set for 4/5/11 at 10:00 AM is re-set for 4/14/2011 at 10:00 AM before Judge Nora Barry Fischer. Text Only Entry: No PDF will issue. This text only entry constitutes the Court's Order or Notice on the matter. (jg)	April 4, 2011	April 4, 2011 PACER
70	Joint MOTION to Extend Time to April 12, 2011 by RICHARD CSUKAS, WILLIAM S. CUNNINGHAM, RUDOLPH A. KARLO, JEFFREY MARIETTI, MARK K. MCLURE, DAVID MEIXELSBERGER, PITTSBURGH GLASS WORKS, LLC, BENJAMIN D. THOMPSON. (Attachments: # 1 Proposed Order) (Evans, Melissa) (Entered: 04/04/2011) 1 Proposed Order View on PACER	April 4, 2011	April 4, 2011 PACER
71	ORDER granting 70 Joint Motion to Extend Time to Supplementa Rule 26(f) Report. The Parties shall file their Supplemental Rule 26(f) Report by 4/12/11. Signed by Judge Nora Barry Fischer on 4/5/11. (jg) (Entered: 04/05/2011)	April 5, 2011	April 5, 2011 PACER
72	SUPPLEMENT by RICHARD CSUKAS, RICHARD CSUKAS, WILLIAM S. CUNNINGHAM, RUDOLPH A. KARLO, JEFFREY MARIETTI, MARK K. MCLURE, DAVID MEIXELSBERGER, PITTSBURGH GLASS WORKS, LLC, BENJAMIN D. THOMPSON to 41 Errata re 39 Report of Rule 26(f) Planning Meeting . (Attachments: # 1 Proposed Delivery Specifications) (Evans, Melissa) (Entered: 04/12/2011) 1 Proposed Delivery Specifications View on PACER	April 12, 2011	April 12, 2011 PACER
73	ANSWER to First Amended Complaint, Amended COUNTERCLAIM, and Affirmative Defenses against All Plaintiffs by PITTSBURGH GLASS WORKS, LLC. (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit A, # 2 Exhibit B, # 3 Exhibit C, # 4 Exhibit D, # 5 Exhibit E, # 6 Exhibit F, # 7 Exhibit G, # 8 Exhibit H, # 9 Exhibit I) (Becker, David) (Entered: 04/14/2011) 1 Exhibit A View on PACER 2 Exhibit B View on PACER 3 Exhibit C View on PACER 4 Exhibit D View on PACER 5 Exhibit E View on PACER 6 Exhibit F View on PACER 7 Exhibit G View on PACER 8 Exhibit H View on PACER 9 Exhibit I View on PACER	April 14, 2011	April 14, 2011 PACER
74	Minute Entry for proceedings held before Judge Nora Barry Fischer: Telephone Case Management/Status Conference held on 4/14/2011 indicating that the Court heard argument on the parties' competing scheduling orders, (see Docket Nos. 66, 67 ), and made its ruling on same. An appropriate Order follows. Thereafter, the parties discussed their supplemental Rule 26(f) report 72, and the current status of production issues addressed therein. As to discovery, the Court was advised that the parties have provided their initial disclosures and production of documents, but that neither party has issued any formal discovery requests to date. The Court was further advised that the parties are cooperating to identify the names of potential deponents in this case. The Court scheduled the first periodic discovery status conference for 5/20/11 at 2:00 p.m. EST, the Court to initiate the call. Prior to said conference, counsel for both parties shall submit a joint agenda for the call to the Court, via email to the Courts law clerk, by 5/13/11 at 5:00 p.m. No transcript was requested as of this date. If a transcript is requested by either party, the Court will issue an appropriate Order. (Court Reporter: K. Earley) (jg) (Entered: 04/15/2011)	April 14, 2011	April 14, 2011 PACER
75	CASE MANAGEMENT ORDER: Exchange of required Rule 26(a) information due by 3/8/2011; Plaintiffs shall file their motion for conditional certification and Court-facilitated notice by 7/15/11 at 5:00 p.m. Defendant's response to said motion shall be filed by 8/15/11 at 5:00 p.m. Plaintiffs' reply brief, if any, shall be filed by 8/29/11 at 5:00 p.m. Defendant's sur-reply brief, if any, shall be filed by 9/12/11 at 5:00 p.m. Hearing and oral argument as to said motion and briefing shall be held on 9/26/11 at 9:00 a.m. in Courtroom 5B, 5th Floor, United States Courthouse, 700 Grant Street, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania. Said hearing shall continue on 9/27/11 at 9:00 a.m., if necessary; The parties shall meet and confer regarding the contents of proposed opt-in notice and consent forms, and work diligently toward developing a mutually acceptable set of forms, which shall be made ready for the Courts review by 9/19/11 at 5:00 p.m.; In the event this action is not conditionally certified as a collective action, fact discovery shall be completed by 12/30/11 at 12:00 p.m. If, however, conditional certification is granted, fact discovery shall be completed by 3/7/12; Upon the Court's ruling on conditional certification, the Court shall conduct a Telephonic Post Certification Discovery Status Conference. Said conference will occur on 10/31/11 at 4:30 p.m.; As agreed to by the parties during the Case Management Conference, the Court shall convene routine telephonic status conferences to address the parties' progress with discovery, as well as any issues or problems that may have arisen. The Court sets the following schedule for same: a. 5/20/11 at 2:00 p.m. EST; b. 6/28/11 at 2:00 p.m. EST; c. 7/27/11 at 2:00 p.m. EST; and d. 8/29/11 at 2:00 p.m. EST; Motions to Amend/Add Parties due 4/15/11;. The Court will establish a schedule for the filing of summary judgment motions upon the completion of all discovery in this case; Other details more fully stated in said Order. Signed by Judge Nora Barry Fischer on 4/18/11. (jg) (Entered: 04/18/2011)	April 18, 2011	April 18, 2011 PACER
76	NOTICE OF FILING OF OFFICIAL TRANSCRIPT of Proceedings held on March 23, 2011 before Judge Nora Barry Fischer. Court Reporter Karen Earley, Telephone number 412-201-2660. The parties have seven (7) calendar days to file with the court a Notice of Intent to Request Redaction of this transcript. If no such Notice is filed, the transcript may be made remotely, electronically available to the public without redaction after 90 calendar days. For redaction purposes, or otherwise, during this 90 day period a copy of the transcript may be purchased from the court reporter or viewed at the clerk's office public terminal. Notice of Intent for Redaction of Personal Data Identifiers due by 4/26/2011. Redaction Request due 5/10/2011. Redacted Transcript Deadline set for 5/20/2011. Release of Transcript Restriction set for 7/18/2011. (kme, ) (Entered: 04/19/2011)	April 19, 2011	April 19, 2011 PACER
77	PLAINTIFFS ANSWER AND AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSES TO DEFENDANTS AMENDED COUNTERCLAIM ANSWER to 73 Answer to Complaint,, Counterclaim, by RICHARD CSUKAS, RICHARD CSUKAS, WILLIAM S. CUNNINGHAM, RUDOLPH A. KARLO, JEFFREY MARIETTI, MARK K. MCLURE, DAVID MEIXELSBERGER, BENJAMIN D. THOMPSON. (Evans, Melissa) (Entered: 05/04/2011)	May 4, 2011	May 4, 2011 PACER
	NOTICE Cancelling Hearing: Given the representations of counsel for the parties to the Court, the status conference scheduled for Friday, May 20, at 2:00 p.m. is cancelled. Text-only entry. No PDF document will issue. This text-only entry constitutes the Order of the Court or Notice on the matter. (jim)	May 16, 2011	May 16, 2011 PACER
	NOTICE of Hearing: The Telephonic Discovery Status Conference set for 6/28/11 at 2:00 PM is re-set for 6/29/2011 at 3:00 PM before Judge Nora Barry Fischer. Text Only Entry: No PDF will issue. This text only entry constitutes the Court's Order or Notice on the matter. (jg)	June 1, 2011	June 1, 2011 PACER
78	Unopposed MOTION for Leave to Postpone Telephonic Discovery Status Conference by RICHARD CSUKAS, RICHARD CSUKAS, WILLIAM S. CUNNINGHAM, RUDOLPH A. KARLO, JEFFREY MARIETTI, MARK K. MCLURE, DAVID MEIXELSBERGER, BENJAMIN D. THOMPSON. (Attachments: # 1 Proposed Order) (Fox, Bruce) (Entered: 06/23/2011) 1 Proposed Order View on PACER	June 23, 2011	June 23, 2011 PACER
79	ORDER granting 78 Unopposed Motion for Leave to Postpone Telephonic Discovery Status Conference; that the Telephonic Discovery Status Conference set for 6/29/11 at 3:00 PM is postponed until 7/5/2011 at 3:00 PM before Judge Nora Barry Fischer. Signed by Judge Nora Barry Fischer on 6/23/11. (jg) (Entered: 06/23/2011)	June 23, 2011	June 23, 2011 PACER
80	Minute Entry for proceedings held before Judge Nora Barry Fischer: TelephonicStatus Conference held on 7/5/2011 in accord with Court's 6/23/11 Order 79 ). At the Conference, the Court discussed concerns voiced by both parties over deposition practice. The Court was also apprised of the need to modify the schedule due to lead plaintiff's counsel's personal issues and the trial schedules of all counsel. The Court will draft an amended order and forward to counsel, who were directed to respond with any objections thereto by 5:00 p.m. 7/6/11. An amended scheduling order will follow. (Court Reporter: None) (jg) Modified on 7/7/2011. (jg, ) (Entered: 07/06/2011)	July 5, 2011	July 5, 2011 PACER
81	MOTION to Withdraw as Attorney Melissa L. Evans on Behalf of Plaintiffs by RICHARD CSUKAS, RICHARD CSUKAS, WILLIAM S. CUNNINGHAM, RUDOLPH A. KARLO, JEFFREY MARIETTI, MARK K. MCLURE, DAVID MEIXELSBERGER, BENJAMIN D. THOMPSON. (Attachments: # 1 Proposed Order) (Fox, Bruce) (Entered: 07/11/2011) 1 Proposed Order View on PACER	July 11, 2011	July 11, 2011 PACER
82	ORDER granting 81 Motion to Withdraw of Attorney Melissa L. Evans. Signed by Judge Nora Barry Fischer on 7/11/11. (jg) (Entered: 07/12/2011)	July 11, 2011	July 11, 2011 PACER
83	AMENDED CASE MANAGEMENT ORDER: Exchange of required Rule 26(a) information due by 3/8/2011; Plaintiffs shall file their motion for conditional certification and Court-facilitated notice by 10/3/11 at 5:00 p.m. Defendant's response to said motion shall be filed by 11/3/11 at 5:00 p.m. Plaintiffs' reply brief, if any, shall be filed by 11/17/11 at 5:00 p.m. Defendant's sur-reply brief, if any, shall be filed by 12/1/11 at 5:00 p.m. Hearing and oral argument as to said motion and briefing shall be held on 12/13/11 at 9:00 a.m. in Courtroom 5B, 5th Floor, United States Courthouse, 700 Grant Street, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania. Said hearing shall continue on 12/14/11 at 9:00 a.m. (originally was set for 9/26/11 and 9/27/11), if necessary; The parties shall meet and confer regarding the contents of proposed opt-in notice and consent forms, and work diligently toward developing a mutually acceptable set of forms, which shall be made ready for the Courts review upon the Courts ruling on certification, at which time the Court will convene a status conference to review same; In the event this action is not conditionally certified as a collective action, fact discovery shall be completed by 12/30/11 at 12:00 p.m. If, however, conditional certification is granted, fact discovery shall be completed by 3/7/12; Upon the Court's ruling on conditional certification, the Court shall conduct a Telephonic Post Certification Discovery Status Conference. Said conference will occur on 1/31/12 at 4:30 PM (was originally set for 10/31/11 at 4:30 p.m.); As agreed to by the parties during the Case Management Conference, the Court shall convene routine telephonic status conferences to address the parties' progress with discovery, as well as any issues or problems that may have arisen. The Court sets the following schedule for same: a. 5/20/11 at 2:00 p.m. EST; b. 6/28/11 at 2:00 p.m. EST; c. 7/27/11 at 2:00 p.m. EST; and d. 8/29/11 at 2:00 p.m. EST; Motions to Amend/Add Parties due 4/15/11; Motion to Amend/Add Parties due 4/15/11; The Court will establish a schedule for the filing of summary judgment motions upon the completion of all discovery in this case; Other details more fully stated in said Order. Signed by Judge Nora Barry Fischer on 7/15/11. (jg) Modified on 7/15/2011. (jg, ) (Entered: 07/15/2011)	July 15, 2011	July 15, 2011 PACER
84	NOTICE of Appearance by Mary Elizabeth Fischman on behalf of RICHARD CSUKAS, RICHARD CSUKAS, WILLIAM S. CUNNINGHAM, RUDOLPH A. KARLO, JEFFREY MARIETTI, MARK K. MCLURE, DAVID MEIXELSBERGER, BENJAMIN D. THOMPSON. (Fischman, Mary) (Entered: 07/20/2011)	July 20, 2011	July 20, 2011 PACER
	ORDER indicating that the Telephonic Discovery Conference set for 7/27/11 at 2:00 PM is cancelled, the parties having advised the Court that said Conference is unnecessary. Ordered by Judge Nora Barry Fischer on 7/25/11. Text-only entry; no PDF document will issue. This text-only entry constitutes the Order of the Court or Notice on the matter. (jg)	July 25, 2011	July 25, 2011 PACER
85	Minute Entry for proceedings held before Judge Nora Barry Fischer: Telephonic Status Conference held on 8/29/2011 indicating that the parties reported on the status of discovery. They also reported that they fully expect to adhere to the schedule the Court has set forth pertaining to conditional class certification. The Court informed parties that they shall both file, by 12/1/11, at 5:00 p.m., a list of witnesses they expect to call at the argument currently scheduled for 12/13/11, at 9:00 a.m. An appropriate Order follows. Defense counsel also indicated the possibility of filing both an omnibus summary judgment motion as well as individual-specific summary judgment motions in the near future. (Court Reporter: None) (jg) (Entered: 08/29/2011)	Aug. 29, 2011	Aug. 29, 2011 PACER
86	ORDER indicating that the parties shall file, by 12/1/11 at 5:00 p.m., a list of the witnesses they expect to call at the hearing and oral argument scheduled for 12/13/11 at 9:00 a.m. (See Docket No. 83 ). Signed by Judge Nora Barry Fischer on 8/29/11. (jg) (Entered: 08/29/2011)	Aug. 29, 2011	Aug. 29, 2011 PACER
87	MOTION for Leave to File Its Second Amended Complaint by RICHARD CSUKAS, RICHARD CSUKAS, WILLIAM S. CUNNINGHAM, RUDOLPH A. KARLO, JEFFREY MARIETTI, MARK K. MCLURE, DAVID MEIXELSBERGER, BENJAMIN D. THOMPSON. (Attachments: # 1 Proposed Order, # 2 Second Amended Complaint, # 3 Exhibit A, # 4 Exhibit B, # 5 Exhibit C, # 6 Exhibit D, # 7 Exhibit E, # 8 Exhibit F, # 9 Exhibit G, # 10 Exhibit H, # 11 Exhibit I, # 12 Exhibit J) (Fox, Bruce) (Entered: 10/03/2011) 1 Proposed Order View on PACER 2 Second Amended Complaint View on PACER 3 Exhibit A View on PACER 4 Exhibit B View on PACER 5 Exhibit C View on PACER 6 Exhibit D View on PACER 7 Exhibit E View on PACER 8 Exhibit F View on PACER 9 Exhibit G View on PACER 10 Exhibit H View on PACER 11 Exhibit I View on PACER 12 Exhibit J View on PACER	Oct. 3, 2011	Oct. 3, 2011 PACER
	ORDER Response/Briefing Schedule re 87 Plaintiffs' Motion for Leave to File Second Amended Complaint: Defendant's Response to said Motion is due by 10/13/2011. Ordered by Judge Nora Barry Fischer on 10/3/11. Text-only entry; no PDF document will issue. This text-only entry constitutes the Order of the Court or Notice on the matter. (jg)	Oct. 3, 2011	Oct. 3, 2011 PACER
88	MOTION to Certify Class and Court-Facilitated Notice by RICHARD CSUKAS, RICHARD CSUKAS, WILLIAM S. CUNNINGHAM, RUDOLPH A. KARLO, JEFFREY MARIETTI, MARK K. MCLURE, DAVID MEIXELSBERGER, BENJAMIN D. THOMPSON. (Attachments: # 1 Proposed Order, # 2 Proposed Notice, # 3 Proposed Consent, # 4 Exhibit A, # 5 Exhibit B, # 6 Exhibit C, # 7 Exhibit D, # 8 Exhibit E, # 9 Exhibit F, # 10 Exhibit G) (Fox, Bruce) (Entered: 10/03/2011) 1 Proposed Order View on PACER 2 Proposed Notice View on PACER 3 Proposed Consent View on PACER 4 Exhibit A View on PACER 5 Exhibit B View on PACER 6 Exhibit C View on PACER 7 Exhibit D View on PACER 8 Exhibit E View on PACER 9 Exhibit F View on PACER 10 Exhibit G View on PACER	Oct. 3, 2011	Oct. 3, 2011 PACER

show / hide docket entries

Case Details

State / Territory: Pennsylvania

Case Type(s):

Equal Employment

Labor Rights

Special Collection(s):

Multi-LexSum (in sample)

Key Dates

Filing Date: Sept. 29, 2010

Closing Date: May 8, 2017

Case Ongoing: No

Plaintiffs

Plaintiff Description:

Employees who were, at any time from on or about March 31, 2009: a) 50 years of age or older; b) Employed by PGW; c) A member of the salaried workforce; and d) Terminated from employment with PGW by the RIF [Reduction in Force] implemented on March 31, 2009.

Plaintiff Type(s):

Private Plaintiff

Public Interest Lawyer: No

Filed Pro Se: No

Class Action Sought: Yes

Class Action Outcome: Granted

Defendants

Pittsburgh Glass Works, LLC (Pittsburgh, Allegheny), Private Entity/Person

Defendant Type(s):

Retailer

Case Details

Causes of Action: