Case: EEOC v. Protis Executive Innovations, Inc.

1:04-cv-01585 | U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Indiana

Filed Date: Sept. 28, 2004

Closed Date: 2008

Clearinghouse coding complete

Case Summary

In September 2004, the Indianapolis District Office of the EEOC filed this lawsuit against Protis Executive Innovations, a professional recruitment and placement agency, alleging discrimination under the Age Discrimination in Employment Act. The complaint specifically alleged that the defendant coded applications by age and denied referrals to applicants age 40 and older because of their ages. Following a settlement conference, the parties settled the lawsuit in March 2005 through a consent de…

In September 2004, the Indianapolis District Office of the EEOC filed this lawsuit against Protis Executive Innovations, a professional recruitment and placement agency, alleging discrimination under the Age Discrimination in Employment Act. The complaint specifically alleged that the defendant coded applications by age and denied referrals to applicants age 40 and older because of their ages. Following a settlement conference, the parties settled the lawsuit in March 2005 through a consent decree.

The three-year consent decree, containing anti-discrimination and retaliation clauses, required the defendant to: to update its recruitment database so that it can regularly search the database for age-related references to applicants; stop using age-related terms, birth dates, or age codes in its database, except

where the applicant has voluntarily provided such information or where age is a bona fide occupational qualification for the position; keep records of any age discriminatory requests from

clients and report the requests to EEOC within 5 days; inform clients in writing within 5 days that both the client and defendant are prohibited under federal law from discriminating against job candidates on any protected basis, that defendant will not discriminate against job candidates on any protected basis, and that defendant will cease making referrals to the client unless it receives a written commitment of nondiscrimination from the client; make compliance reports to the EEOC; keep records; allow the EEOC access for monitoring; post notice of employee rights; provide training; and pay $150,000 to affected individuals identified by the Commission.

The terms of the agreement were to run for 3 years. The docket sheet does not show any further enforcement took place; the case was presumably closed in 2008.

Summary Authors

Daisy Manning (3/18/2008)

Clearinghouse (6/10/2017)

Documents in the Clearinghouse

Document

1:04-cv-01585

Docket (PACER)

March 18, 2005

March 18, 2005

Docket
1

1:04-cv-01585

Complaint

Sept. 28, 2004

Sept. 28, 2004

Complaint
18

1:04-cv-01585

Consent Decree

March 18, 2005

March 18, 2005

Settlement Agreement

1:04-cv-01585

EEOC Litigation Settlement Report (March 2005)

March 18, 2005

March 18, 2005

Press Release

1:04-cv-01585

EEOC's Office of General Counsel FY 2005 Annual Report [Excerpt]

April 13, 2006

April 13, 2006

Press Release

Resources

Docket

Last updated April 1, 2024, 3:01 a.m.

ECF Number Description Date Link Date / Link
1

COMPLAINT against Defendant, PROTIS EXECUTIVE INNOVATIONS, INC. with JURY DEMAND, filed by Plaintiff, EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY COMMISSION.(DMW, ) (Entered: 09/28/2004)

Sept. 28, 2004

Sept. 28, 2004

3

MAGISTRATE JUDGE's NOTICE of Availability to Exercise Jurisdiction issued (DMW, ) (Entered: 09/28/2004)

Sept. 28, 2004

Sept. 28, 2004

4

Summons Issued as to Defendant, PROTIS EXECUTIVE INNOVATIONS, INC.. (DMW, ) (Entered: 09/28/2004)

Sept. 28, 2004

Sept. 28, 2004

5

RETURN of Service by CMRRR by EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY COMMISSION. PROTIS EXECUTIVE INNOVATIONS, INC. served on 9/29/2004. (Note: Green card COPY submitted - original not filed.) (LSC, ) (Entered: 10/07/2004)

Oct. 7, 2004

Oct. 7, 2004

6

NOTICE of Appearance by Andrew W. Gruber on behalf of PROTIS EXECUTIVE INNOVATIONS, INC. (Gruber, Andrew) (Entered: 10/19/2004)

Oct. 19, 2004

Oct. 19, 2004

7

NOTICE of Appearance by Duane R. Denton on behalf of PROTIS EXECUTIVE INNOVATIONS, INC. (Denton, Duane) (Entered: 10/19/2004)

Oct. 19, 2004

Oct. 19, 2004

8

NOTICE of Parties' First Extension of Time by PROTIS EXECUTIVE INNOVATIONS, INC. (Gruber, Andrew) (Entered: 10/19/2004)

Oct. 19, 2004

Oct. 19, 2004

9

CORPORATE DISCLOSURE STATEMENT Pursuant to Local Rule 81.2 by PROTIS EXECUTIVE INNOVATIONS, INC.. (Gruber, Andrew) (Entered: 10/19/2004)

Oct. 19, 2004

Oct. 19, 2004

10

Unopposed MOTION for Extension of Time to December 20, 2004 to Respond to Complaint by PROTIS EXECUTIVE INNOVATIONS, INC.. (Attachments: # 1 Text of Proposed Order)(Gruber, Andrew) (Entered: 11/15/2004)

Nov. 15, 2004

Nov. 15, 2004

11

ORDER granting deft's 10 Motion for Extension of Time to File response to complaint. Deft's responsive pleading is stayed pending a Telephonic Status Conference set for 12/2/2004 03:30 PM before Magistrate Judge Tim A. Baker. Signed by Judge Tim A. Baker on 11/22/04. (SWM, ) (Entered: 11/23/2004)

Nov. 22, 2004

Nov. 22, 2004

12

ORDER on 12/2/04 Telephonic Status Conference. Parties appeared by counsel. Discussion held regarding settlement and related matters. The deadline for Deft to answer or otherwise respond to the complaint is stayed pending further order. SCHEDULING ORDER: Status Conference set for 2/17/2005 10:00 AM Telephonic before Magistrate Judge Tim A. Baker . Signed by Judge Tim A. Baker on 12/3/04. (SWM, ) (Entered: 12/06/2004)

Dec. 3, 2004

Dec. 3, 2004

13

Unopposed MOTION for Continuance of February 17, 2005 Status Conference by EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY COMMISSION. (Attachments: # 1 Text of Proposed Order)(Maple, Johanna) (Entered: 02/14/2005)

Feb. 14, 2005

Feb. 14, 2005

14

ORDER granting pltf's 13 Motion for Continuance of Telephonic Status Conference currently set for 2/17/2005.SCHEDULING ORDER: Status Conference RESET for 2/22/2005 02:00 PM Telephonic before Magistrate Judge Tim A. Baker . Signed by Judge Tim A. Baker on 2/16/05. (SWM, ) (Entered: 02/16/2005)

Feb. 16, 2005

Feb. 16, 2005

15

ORDER on 2/22/05 Telephonic Status Conference and ORDER setting Settlement Conference and related deadlines. Parties appeared by counsel. Discussion held regarding settlement and related matters. SCHEDULING ORDER: Settlement Conference set for 3/8/2005 09:00 AM in room #234 before Magistrate Judge Tim A. Baker (confidential settlement statements due three business days prior to the conference). Signed by Judge Tim A. Baker on 2/23/05. (SWM, ) (Entered: 02/23/2005)

Feb. 23, 2005

Feb. 23, 2005

16

ORDER on 3/8/05 settlement conference. Parties appeared in person and by counsel. Settlement discussions were held, and this case is now settled. Parties shall file a proposed consent decree w/i 30 days. Signed by Judge Tim A. Baker on 3/9/05. (SWM, ) (Entered: 03/09/2005)

March 9, 2005

March 9, 2005

17

Joint MOTION For Entry of a Consent Decree by EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY COMMISSION, PROTIS EXECUTIVE INNOVATIONS, INC.. (Attachments: # 1 Text of Proposed Order Proposed Consent Decree)(Maple, Johanna) (Entered: 03/16/2005)

March 16, 2005

March 16, 2005

18

CLOSED JUDGMENT via CONSENT DECREE in favor of Plaintiff against Defendant w/Retention of Jurisdiction by Court. Signed by Judge David Frank Hamilton on 3/18/2005. c/m(LSC, ) (Entered: 03/18/2005)

March 18, 2005

March 18, 2005

Case Details

State / Territory: Indiana

Case Type(s):

Equal Employment

Special Collection(s):

EEOC Study — in sample

Multi-LexSum (in sample)

Key Dates

Filing Date: Sept. 28, 2004

Closing Date: 2008

Case Ongoing: No

Plaintiffs

Plaintiff Description:

Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, on behalf of one or more workers.

Plaintiff Type(s):

EEOC Plaintiff

Attorney Organizations:

EEOC

Public Interest Lawyer: Yes

Filed Pro Se: No

Class Action Sought: No

Class Action Outcome: Not sought

Defendants

Protis Executive Innovations, Inc. (Avon, Indiana; Indianapolis, Indiana), Private Entity/Person

Case Details

Causes of Action:

Age Discrimination in Employment Act (ADEA), 29 U.S.C. §§ 621 et seq.

Available Documents:

Trial Court Docket

Complaint (any)

Monetary Relief

Injunctive (or Injunctive-like) Relief

Outcome

Prevailing Party: Plaintiff

Nature of Relief:

Injunction / Injunctive-like Settlement

Damages

Source of Relief:

Settlement

Form of Settlement:

Court Approved Settlement or Consent Decree

Amount Defendant Pays: 150000

Order Duration: 2005 - 2008

Content of Injunction:

Discrimination Prohibition

Retaliation Prohibition

Other requirements regarding hiring, promotion, retention

Post/Distribute Notice of Rights / EE Law

Provide antidiscrimination training

Reporting

Recordkeeping

Monitoring

Issues

General:

Pattern or Practice

Discrimination-area:

Disparate Treatment

Other Conditions of Employment (including assignment, transfer, hours, working conditions, etc)

Discrimination-basis:

Age discrimination

EEOC-centric:

Direct Suit on Merits