On June 6, 2003, a group of African American and Latino employees filed a lawsuit Title VII of the Civil Rights Act, 42 U.S.C. § 2000e, 42 U.S.C. § 1981 and the California Fair Employment and Housing Act, Cal. Gov't Code § 12940 et seq., ("FEHA"), against FedEx in Alamenda County Superior Court. On November 12, 2003, defendants removed the case to the United States District Court of the Northern District of California. Plaintiffs had filed a separate lawsuit on June 19, 2003, in the United States District Court, Northern District of California; the cases were related on September 23, 2003, and consolidated on November 13, 2003. The plaintiffs, represented by private counsel, asked the court for declaratory and injunctive relief, alleging that FedEx discriminated against its African American and Latino employees. Specifically, the plaintiffs contended that FedEx's promotions, compensation, and discipline practices were discriminatory.
On March 21, 2005, the District Court (Judge Susan Illston) granted Plaintiffs' motion under Rule 56(f) to continue all motions until the close of discovery. Satchell v. Federal Express Corp., 2005 WL 646058 (N.D. C.A. Mar. 21, 2005).
On September 28, 2005, the District Court certified two classes, a "Minority Employee Class" and an "African American Lower-Level Manager Class." Satchell et al v. Federal Express Corp., 2005 WL 2397522 (N.D. C.A. Sept. 28, 2005).
On December 5, 2006 the District Court imposed sanctions on Defendants for failing to comply with discovery requests. Satchell v. Federal Express Corp., 2006 WL 3507913 (N.D. C.A. Dec. 5, 2006).
On December 5, 2006, the District Court dismissed class claims under the California Fair Employment and Housing Act.
On April 13, 2007, the District Court: preliminarily approved a class action settlement; provisionally certified settlement classes; directed distribution of notice of the settlement; and set a schedule for the final settlement approval process. Satchell v. Federal Express Corp., 2007 WL 1114010 (N.D. C.A. Apr. 13, 2007). Plaintiffs were awarded more than $50 million; they also secured injunctive relief relating to hiring, promotion, discipline, and reporting.
The District Court issued an order setting the interest rate for Plaintiffs' award and attorneys' fees on June 20, 2007.
On August 14, 2007, the District Court granted final approval to the consent decree and confirmed the final certification of the classes. Satchell v. Federal Express Corp., 2007 WL 2343904 (N.D. C.A. Aug. 14, 2007). On the same day, the Court granted: Plaintiffs' motion for attorneys' fees and costs; and Plaintiffs' motion for approval of service payments. Satchell v. Federal Express Corp., 2007 WL 2343904 (N.D. C.A. Aug. 14, 2007).
On May 28, 2008, the District Court issued an order regarding payments to class members. Several late claims were accepted, but the order stated that no further late claims would be paid.
On July 9, 2008, the District Court granted Defendant's motion for counterclaim and interpleader relief with regard to non-class claims. Satchell v. Federal Express Corp., 2008 WL 2705402 (N.D. C.A. Jul. 9, 2008).
Pursuant to a stipulation between the parties, the District Court dismissed non-class claims on July 11, 2008.
On December 29, 2008, the District Court awarded Plaintiffs' attorneys' fees related to their motion for declaratory relief. Satchell v. Federal Express Corp., 2008 WL 5411470 (N.D. C.A. Dec. 29, 2008).
On January 13, 2010, the District Court denied defendants' motion for reconsideration of award of attorneys' fees related to the motion for declaratory relief. The Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals affirmed the award of attorneys' fees but vacated the imposition of sanctions on June 16, 2010. On June 25, 2010, the Court of Appeals denied a motion to stay its order. There has been no further action in the case.Haley Waller - 08/17/2010