University of Michigan Law School
Civil Rights Litigation Clearinghouse
new search
page permalink
Case Name Ramirez v. Cintas Corporation EE-CA-0190
Docket / Court 04-0281 ( N.D. Cal. )
State/Territory California
Case Type(s) Equal Employment
Case Summary
On January 20, 2004, Cintas Corporation employees filed a lawsuit against Cintas under 42 U.S.C. § 1981, Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, 42 U.S.C. § 2000e, et seq., the California Fair Employment and Housing Act, and the California Unfair Business Practices Act, in the United States ... read more >
On January 20, 2004, Cintas Corporation employees filed a lawsuit against Cintas under 42 U.S.C. § 1981, Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, 42 U.S.C. § 2000e, et seq., the California Fair Employment and Housing Act, and the California Unfair Business Practices Act, in the United States District Court for the Northern District of California. The plaintiffs, represented initially by private counsel, asked the Court for declaratory, equitable, and compensatory relief, claiming that Cintas engaged in a pattern or practice of employment discrimination on the basis of race, national origin, and sex. Specifically, the Plaintiffs claimed that Cintas engaged in, among other practices, discriminatory hiring, recruitment, promotion, assignment, transfer, and compensation.

On October 29, 2004, the Court (Judge Jeffrey S. White) issued a stipulation and order that defined the scope of the class claims, allowed Plaintiffs to file a third amended complaint, and outlined limited discovery and the schedule for Defendant's motion to compel arbitration.

On March 22, 2005, the Court granted Defendant's motion to compel three plaintiffs to arbitrate their claims and stayed the action as to those plaintiffs pending completion of the arbitration proceedings. The Court denied Defendant's motion to dismiss to the extent it sought to dismiss those plaintiffs from the action. Ramirez v. Cintas Corp., 2005 WL 658984 (N.D. Cal. Mar. 22, 2005).

The Court granted the EEOC's motion to intervene on April 26, 2005. Finding that the subject matter was of public importance, that the litigation was still in its early stages, that neither party would be prejudiced, and that neither Plaintiff nor Defendant objected to the EEOC's intervention, the Court ordered the EEOC to file a complaint in intervention within seven days. The EEOC filed its complaint in intervention on April 27, 2005. The complaint asked the Court for equitable relief, back-pay, and punitive damages.

On September 20, 2005, after the parties filed a stipulation, the Court issued an order relating Ramirez v. Cintas with Houston v. Cintas (Northern District of California, Docket No. C-05-03145-CRB). The Houston case was also transferred to Judge White.

On November 2, 2005, the Court granted Defendant's motion to compel another plaintiff to arbitrate his claims and stayed that action as to that Plaintiffs pending completion of the arbitration proceedings. The Court denied Defendant's motion to dismiss to the extent it sought to dismiss the Plaintiff from the action. Ramirez v. Cintas Corp., 2005 WL 2894628 (N.D. Cal. Nov. 2, 2005).

On December 8, 2005, based on the parties' joint stipulation, the Court dismissed the class action representatives individual claims with prejudice and removed her as the class representative. The order specified, however, that the former class representative could participate as a member of the certified class if she qualified under the class definition.

On January 12, 2006, the Court dismissed another putative class representative's claim claims and individuals claims based on the parties' joint stipulation. The Court found that the individual Plaintiff could not serve as class representative and was not entitled to attorneys' fees and costs. The Court issued a similar order regarding another individual plaintiff on March 9, 2006.

On May 11, 2006, the Court ordered that class claims of discrimination against African Americans, Hispanics, and women in hiring for certain positions at Cintas' Rental Division, made pursuant to Title VII and § 1981, were transferred to the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Michigan. All other claims had been dismissed or stayed pending arbitration.

The arbitrator filed an opinion on September 15, 2006. The arbitrator found that the Cintas Employment Agreements permit class-wide arbitration and that there was no limitation to where the class action may be heard.

The Court denied Defendant's motion to vacate the arbitration decision on November 22, 2006. The Court found that the arbitrator had not "manifestly disregarded the law" and that the decision was not irrational. Ramirez v. Cintas Corp., 2006 WL 3388628 (N.D. Cal. Nov. 22, 2006).

The Court granted Plaintiffs' motion to dismiss the putative class action claims without prejudice so that they were able to proceed with their individual claims through arbitration on April 3, 2009. Defendant did not oppose the motion and the case was closed on January 28, 2010.

Haley Waller - 08/21/2010


compress summary

- click to show/hide ALL -
Issues and Causes of Action
click to show/hide detail
Issues
Discrimination-area
Hiring
Other Conditions of Employment (including assignment, transfer, hours, working conditions, etc)
Pay / Benefits
Promotion
Training
Discrimination-basis
National origin discrimination
Race discrimination
EEOC-centric
EEOC intervened in private suit
General
Disparate Treatment
National Origin/Ethnicity
Hispanic
Plaintiff Type
EEOC Plaintiff
Private Plaintiff
Race
Black
Causes of Action Title VII (including PDA), 42 U.S.C. § 2000e
42 U.S.C. § 1981
Defendant(s) Cintas Corporation
Plaintiff Description African American and Hispanic employees of Cintas Corporation.
Indexed Lawyer Organizations None on record
Class action status sought Yes
Class action status granted No
Prevailing Party Unknown
Public Int. Lawyer Yes
Nature of Relief Unknown
Source of Relief Unknown
Form of Settlement None on record
Order Duration not on record
Case Closing Year n/a
Case Ongoing No
Case Listing EE-CA-0308 : Houston v. Cintas Corporation (N.D. Cal.)
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 ]

Docket(s)
3:04-cv-00281-JSW (N.D. Cal.) 02/22/2008
EE-CA-0190-9000.pdf | Detail
PACER [Public Access to Court Electronic Records]
3:04−cv−00281 (N.D. Cal.) 02/22/2008
EE-CA-0190-9002.pdf | Detail
PACER [Public Access to Court Electronic Records]
3:04−cv−00281 (N.D. Cal.) 01/28/2010
EE-CA-0190-9003.pdf | Detail
PACER [Public Access to Court Electronic Records]
General Documents
First Amended Class Action Complaint 04/26/2004
EE-CA-0190-0003.pdf | Detail
Document Source: PACER [Public Access to Court Electronic Records]
STIPULATION AND ORDER TO (1) NARROW THE SECOND AMENDED COMPLAINT; (2) ADDRESS ISSUES RAISED IN DEFENDANT’S VENUE MOTION; (3) REVISE THE BRIEFING SCHEDULE FOR . . . DEFENDANT’S ARBITRATION MOTION; (4) CONTINUE THE CASE MANAGEMENT CONFERENCE DATES 10/29/2004 (N.D. Cal.)
EE-CA-0190-0023.pdf | Detail
Document Source: PACER [Public Access to Court Electronic Records]
Third Amended Complaint and Demand for Jury Trial 11/17/2004
EE-CA-0190-0004.pdf | Detail
Document Source: PACER [Public Access to Court Electronic Records]
Order [Re: Motion to Dismiss Claims] 03/22/2005 (2005 WL 658984 / 2005 U.S.Dist.LEXIS 9237) (N.D. Cal.)
EE-CA-0190-0026.pdf | WESTLAW| LEXIS | Detail
ORDER GRANTING EEOC’S MOTION FOR LEAVE TO INTERVENE 04/26/2005 (N.D. Cal.)
EE-CA-0190-0024.pdf | Detail
Document Source: PACER [Public Access to Court Electronic Records]
Complaint-In-Intervention 04/27/2005
EE-CA-0190-0005.pdf | Detail
Document Source: PACER [Public Access to Court Electronic Records]
Fourth Amended Complaint and Demand for Jury Trial 08/03/2005
EE-CA-0190-0001.pdf | Detail
Motion of Defendant [To Consolidate] 08/26/2005
EE-CA-0190-0012.pdf | Detail
Document Source: PACER [Public Access to Court Electronic Records]
Stipulation and Order To Have Cases Related 09/20/2005 (N.D. Cal.)
EE-CA-0190-0011.pdf | Detail
Document Source: PACER [Public Access to Court Electronic Records]
Amended Complaint-in-Intervention 10/20/2005
EE-CA-0190-0006.pdf | Detail
Document Source: PACER [Public Access to Court Electronic Records]
Order [Re: Motion to Dismiss Claims] 11/02/2005 (2005 WL 2894628 / 2005 U.S.Dist.LEXIS 43531) (N.D. Cal.)
EE-CA-0190-0027.pdf | WESTLAW| LEXIS | Detail
DEFENDANT CINTAS CORPORATION’S ANSWER TO EEOC’S AMENDED COMPLAINT-IN INTERVENTION 11/07/2005
EE-CA-0190-0022.pdf | Detail
Document Source: PACER [Public Access to Court Electronic Records]
Joint Stipulation of Dismissal and Order [Re: Sandra Evans] 12/08/2005 (N.D. Cal.)
EE-CA-0190-0007.pdf | Detail
Document Source: PACER [Public Access to Court Electronic Records]
Joint Stipulation of Dismissal and Order [Re: Robert Harris] 01/12/2006 (N.D. Cal.)
EE-CA-0190-0008.pdf | Detail
Document Source: PACER [Public Access to Court Electronic Records]
Joint Stipulation of Dismissal and Order [Re: Luis Pocasangre Cardoza] 03/09/2006 (N.D. Cal.)
EE-CA-0190-0009.pdf | Detail
Document Source: PACER [Public Access to Court Electronic Records]
STIPULATION AND ORDER REGARDING TRANSFER OF PLAINTIFFS JONES’ AND AVALOS’ TITLE VII AND SECTION 1981 CLAIMS AND EEOC INTERVENTION COMPLAINT TO THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN, DISMISSAL OF PLAINTIFF AVALOS’ STATE LAW CLAIMS. . . 05/11/2006 (N.D. Cal.)
EE-CA-0190-0017.pdf | Detail
Document Source: PACER [Public Access to Court Electronic Records]
STIPULATED CONSOLIDATED CONFIDENTIALITY AGREEMENT AND AGREED PROTECTIVE ORDER 05/19/2006 (N.D. Cal.)
EE-CA-0190-0025.pdf | Detail
Document Source: PACER [Public Access to Court Electronic Records]
Arbitrator's Opinion and Decision Re Issues of Class Action Arbitration 09/15/2006 (2006 WL 6461235)
EE-CA-0190-0014.pdf | WESTLAW | Detail
Document Source: PACER [Public Access to Court Electronic Records]
DEFENDANT CINTAS CORPORATION’S REPLY IN SUPPORT OF MOTION TO VACATE ARBITRATION AWARD; MEMORANDUM OF POINTS AND AUTHORITIES IN SUPPORT THEREOF 10/27/2006
EE-CA-0190-0015.pdf | Detail
Document Source: PACER [Public Access to Court Electronic Records]
PLAINTIFFS' OPPOSITION TO DEFENDANT'S MOTION TO VACATE ARBITRATION AWARD 10/31/2006
EE-CA-0190-0016.pdf | Detail
Document Source: PACER [Public Access to Court Electronic Records]
Order [Denying Petition to Vacate Arbitration Award] 11/22/2006 (2006 WL 3388628 / 2006 U.S.Dist.LEXIS 86303) (N.D. Cal.)
EE-CA-0190-0028.pdf | WESTLAW| LEXIS | Detail
[Order Granting] Joint Stipulation of Dismissal of Plaintiff Coretta Vick's Individual Claims [] 12/14/2007 (2007 WL 4410414) (N.D. Cal.)
EE-CA-0190-0010.pdf | WESTLAW | Detail
Document Source: PACER [Public Access to Court Electronic Records]
Student Memo on Consolidation 05/21/2008
EE-CA-0190-0013.pdf | Detail
PLAINTIFFS'·SUPPLEMENTAL MEMORANDUM OF POINTS AND AUTHORITIES IN SUPPORT OF UNOPPOSED MOTION TO APPROVE DISMISSAL, WITHOUT PREJUDICE AND WITHOUT NOTICE, OF PUTATIVE CLASS CLAIMS OF (certain) PLAINTIFFS 04/02/2009 (N.D. Cal.)
EE-CA-0190-0018.pdf | Detail
Document Source: PACER [Public Access to Court Electronic Records]
ORDER GRANTING UNOPPOSED MOTION FOR APPROVAL OF DISMISSAL, WITHOUT PREJUDICE AND WITHOUT NOTICE, OF PUTATIVE CLASS CLAIMS OF (certain) PLAINTIFFS 04/03/2009 (2009 WL 921629) (N.D. Cal.)
EE-CA-0190-0020.pdf | WESTLAW | Detail
Document Source: PACER [Public Access to Court Electronic Records]
ORDER OF ADMINISTRATIVE CLOSURE 09/25/2009 (N.D. Cal.)
EE-CA-0190-0019.pdf | Detail
Document Source: PACER [Public Access to Court Electronic Records]
JOINT STIPULATION OF DISMISSAL OF PLAINTIFFS' REMAINING CLAIMS WITH PREJUDICE AND ORDER 01/28/2010 (N.D. Cal.)
EE-CA-0190-0021.pdf | Detail
Document Source: PACER [Public Access to Court Electronic Records]
Judges White, Jeffrey Steven (N.D. Cal.)
EE-CA-0190-0017 | EE-CA-0190-0019 | EE-CA-0190-0020 | EE-CA-0190-0021 | EE-CA-0190-0023 | EE-CA-0190-0024 | EE-CA-0190-0025 | EE-CA-0190-9003
Monitors/Masters None on record
Plaintiff's Lawyers Baller, Morris J. (California)
EE-CA-0190-0016 | EE-CA-0190-0018 | EE-CA-0190-9000 | EE-CA-0190-9003
Eberle, Betty (Wisconsin)
EE-CA-0190-0016 | EE-CA-0190-9003
Entin, Scott A. (Illinois)
EE-CA-0190-9000
Jaramillo, Joseph E. (California)
EE-CA-0190-0016 | EE-CA-0190-0018 | EE-CA-0190-9000 | EE-CA-0190-9003
Kan, James (California)
EE-CA-0190-0016 | EE-CA-0190-9003
Legenza, Sharon K. (Illinois)
EE-CA-0190-9000
Maldonado, Nancy L. (Illinois)
EE-CA-0190-9000
Mills, Heather Marie (California)
EE-CA-0190-0018 | EE-CA-0190-9003
Siskind, Sarah (Wisconsin)
EE-CA-0190-0018 | EE-CA-0190-0021 | EE-CA-0190-9003
Steele, Roberta L. (California)
EE-CA-0190-0016 | EE-CA-0190-0018 | EE-CA-0190-0021 | EE-CA-0190-9000 | EE-CA-0190-9003
Strauss, Paul Leonard (Illinois)
EE-CA-0190-0016 | EE-CA-0190-9000 | EE-CA-0190-9003
Defendant's Lawyers Abell, Nancy L. (California)
EE-CA-0190-0015 | EE-CA-0190-0021 | EE-CA-0190-0022 | EE-CA-0190-9000 | EE-CA-0190-9003
Atkinson, Mark W. (California)
EE-CA-0190-0022 | EE-CA-0190-9003
Baca, Elena (California)
EE-CA-0190-0015 | EE-CA-0190-0022 | EE-CA-0190-9003
Deng, Joseph W. (California)
EE-CA-0190-0022 | EE-CA-0190-9003
Geier, Jon A. (District of Columbia)
EE-CA-0190-9000
Grossman, Paul (District of Columbia)
EE-CA-0190-0015 | EE-CA-0190-9003
Morgan, Heather A. (California)
EE-CA-0190-0021 | EE-CA-0190-0022 | EE-CA-0190-9003
O'Neill, Maureen (Georgia)
EE-CA-0190-9000
Rowe, Rachael (Ohio)
EE-CA-0190-9000
Womack, Michael (Ohio)
EE-CA-0190-9000
Other Lawyers Kryvoruka, Kenneth J (District of Columbia)
EE-CA-0190-9000
Unitas, Robert D (District of Columbia)
EE-CA-0190-9000
White-Dunston, Erica D. (Maryland)
EE-CA-0190-9000

- click to show/hide ALL -

new search
page permalink

- top of page -