Cases

PER CURIAM: As we noted in our opinion, Texas v. EEOC, 827 F.3d 372, 382-83 (5th Cir. 2016), shortly before the opinion’s issuance the Supreme Court decided U.S. Army Corps of Eng’rs v. Hawkes Co., — U.S. -, 136 S.Ct. 1807, 195 L.Ed.2d 77 (2016), which held in the context of the Clean Water Act that a jurisdictional determination (“JD”) is

PATRICK E. HIGGINBOTHAM, Circuit Judge, dissenting: I am not persuaded that this controversy meets Article Ill’s demand of ripeness, injury, and adversarial engagement. Nor am I persuaded that we have been called upon to review an action of the EEOC with sufficient finality to support our jurisdiction. Texas seeks to challenge an EEOC “Enforcement Guidance” document that the EEOC cannot enforce against it. This

MEMORANDUM and ORDER SUSAN K. LEE, United States Magistrate Judge. I. Introduction Before the Court is the motion of Defendant, Texas Hydraulics, Inc. (“Defendant”), for an order compelling the production of certain documents withheld from production on the basis of a claim of privilege(s) by Plaintiff, Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (“Plaintiff’ or “EEOC”) [Doc. No

583 F.Supp.2d 904 (2008) EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY COMMISSION, Plaintiff, v. TEXAS HYDRAULICS, INC., Defendant. No. 1:06-CV-161. United States District Court, E.D. Tennessee, at Chattanooga. April 16, 2008. *906 Faye A. Williams, Steven W. Dills, Deidre Smith, United States of America, Equal Employment Opportunity Commission,

JERRY E. SMITH, Circuit Judge: Texas sued the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission ("EEOC") and the Attorney General ("Defendants"), challenging EEOC's guidance on employers' use of criminal records in hiring. Texas alleged that guidance constituted an unlawfully promulgated substantive rule and sought to enjoin its enforcement. The state also asked for a declaration per the Declaratory Judgment Act ("DJA") that it could lawfull

391 F.3d 685 BRAZORIA COUNTY, TEXAS; David Christian, former Justice of the Peace of Brazoria County, Texas (Precinct 2), Petitioners-Cross-Respondents,v.EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY COMMISSION; United States of America, Respondents-Cross-Respondents, andKyle Knight, Intervenor-Cross-Petitioner. No. 03-60709. United States Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit. Novembe

*1204516 U. S. 1172; ante, p. 1120; ante, p. 1105; 516 U. S. 1051; 516 U. S. 1125; ante, p. 1106; ante, p. 1106; 516 U. S. 1161; 516 U. S. 1176; 516 U. S. 1177; ante, p. 1106;

*1204516 U. S. 1172; ante, p. 1120; ante, p. 1105; 516 U. S. 1051; 516 U. S. 1125; ante, p. 1106; ante, p. 1106; 516 U. S. 1161; 516 U. S. 1176; 516 U. S. 1177; ante, p. 1106;

MEMORANDUM AND ORDER Casper, United States District Judge I. Introduction Plaintiff Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (“EEOC”) has filed this lawsuit against Defendants Texas Roadhouse, Inc., Texas Roadhouse Holdings LLC and Texas Roadhouse Management Corp. (collectively, “Texas Roadhouse”) alleging a pattern or practice of age discrimination under the Age Discrimination in Employmen

GOULD, Circuit Judge: Russell Holt received a conditional job offer from BNSF Railway Company ("BNSF") for the position of Senior Patrol Officer, contingent on Holt's satisfactory completion of a post-offer medical review. During that medical review, Holt disclosed that he had injured his back four years before, suffering a two-level spinal disc extrusion. Holt's primary care doctor, his chiropractor, and the doctor BNSF's subcont

ORDER ON PLAINTIFF’S MOTION TO QUASH SUBPOENAS AND FOR PROTECTIVE ORDER (# 109) KELLEY, United States Magistrate Judge. Familiarity with the background of this case as set forth in the Court’s Order on Motion No. 132 is presumed. *2The EEOC has moved to quash eleven third-party subpoenas issued by defendants to current emplo

EDWARD C. PRADO, Circuit Judge: Following a six-day trial, a jury found that EmCare, Inc. (“EmCare”) terminated three employees in retaliation for complaining of sexual harassment in the workplace. The district court denied EmCare’s motion for judgment as a matter of law. EmCare' appeals the judgment with respect to one employee, Luke Trahan. Specifically, EmCare contends that the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (“EE

JILL PRYOR, Circuit Judge: A jury awarded the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (the "EEOC") and Contrice Travis back pay, compensatory damages, and punitive damages after finding that Travis's employer, Exel, Inc., discriminated against her because of her sex. The discrimination occurred when Dave Harris, Travis's supervisor, denied her a promotion in favor of Michael Pooler, a male employee. After the verdict, Exel filed a

OPINION AND ORDER BARBARA B. CRABB, District Judge Plaintiff Equal Employment Opportunity' Commission has' filed this civil action against defendant Flambeau, Iric., alleging a violation of the Americans with Disabilities Act. Specifically, plaintiff contends that defendant violated 42 U.S.C. § 12112(d)(4)(A), which generally prohibits employers from requiring their employees to submit to medical examinations, by

MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER A. JOE FISH, Senior United States District Judge Before the court is the defendant’s motion for summary judgment (docket entry 27). For the reasons discussed below, the motion is granted. I. BACKGROUND A. Procedural Background The plaintiff, the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (“the EEOC”), commenced this

BACHARACH, Circuit Judge. This appeal grew out of a dispute between a company and its former employee. In that dispute, the company asserted certain legal positions that an agency viewed as unlawful. In light of this view, the agency sued the company in part for unlawful interference with statutory rights. Responding to this suit, the company disavowed the legal positions know

JORDAN, Circuit Judge: We withdraw our previous opinion, dated September 15, 2016, and published at 837 F.3d 1156, and issue this revised opinion: The Equal Employment Opportunity Commission filed suit on behalf of Chastity Jones, a black job applicant whose offer of employment was rescinded by Catastrophe Management Solutions pursuant to its race-neu

PHILLIPS, Circuit Judge. Kent Duty filed this suit against a railroad company, BNSF Railway Company (“BNSF”), after he applied to work there as a locomotive electrician. Duty has an impairment that limits his grip strength in his right hand. Fearing that Duty would fall from ladders, BNSF revoked his offer for employment. Duty and the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (t

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA ____________________________________ ) UNITED STATES EQUAL ) EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY ) COMMISSION, ) ) Plaintiff, ) Case No. 17-cv-1978 (CKK/GMH) ) v. )

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA U.S. EQUAL EMPLOYMENT : OPPORTUNITY COMMISSION, : : Plaintiff, : Civil Action No.: 21-2539 (RC) : v. : Re Document Nos.: 45, 49