Free Letter - District Court of Delaware - Delaware

Case 1:04-cv-01304-KAJ

Document 38-3

Filed 12/12/2005

Page 1 of 2

U.S. EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY COMMISSION Pittsburgh Area Office

Liberty Center 1001 Liberty Avenue, Suite 300 Pittsburgh, PA 15222-4187 (412) 644-3444 TTY (412) 644-2720 FAX (412) 644-2664

M. Jean Clickner, SeniorTrial Attorney Direct Dial: (412) 644-6439 Facsimile: (412) 644-4935 E-mail: [email protected]

December 12, 2005 Via Facsimile and First Class Mail Thomas S. Neuberger, Esquire The Neuberger Firm Two East Seventh Street, Suite 302 Wilmington, Delaware 19801-3707

Re:

EEOC v. P.T. Morgan Paper Company affiliated with P.T. Morgan Packaging Company Civil Action No. 04-00135 (D. DE.)

Dear Mr. Neuberger:

I was not in the office on Friday, thus I did not receive your telephone message and email communication cancelling this week's depositions until this morning. I must say that this is not the proper time for a summary judgment motion. In fact, I believe that filing such a motion at this time constitutes a flagrant disregard for the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure and for the court's unequivocal standard of review for summary judgment. As you well know, a summary judgment requires a fact based analysis and argument. Yet, you inform that you intend to file a summary judgment motion on the issue of the number of employees without permitting the Commission an opportunity to conduct full and adequate discovery on the issue of the interrelationship between P.T. Morgan Paper and P.T. Morgan Packaging. The mere fact that you file such a motion does not stay discovery. The Commission intends to move forward with litigation, including its depositions and discovery requests. You are not excused from a timely response to the Commission's outstanding discovery requests. Moreover, I ask that you cooperate in scheduling the Commission's depositions. On December 6th, I sent you an e-mail communication inquiring whether you would be free to defend the depositions of Rose Grabowski and Robbi Smith on January 23, 2006, as I will be taking the deposition of James Morgan on January 24, 2006. You have not responded to that inquiry. I am asking that you reconsider your decision to cancel the four depositions scheduled for this week. My clients are ready and willing to attend. If their depositions are cancelled now, the Commission will consider not making them available for deposition without an Order of court. Page 1 of 2

Case 1:04-cv-01304-KAJ

Document 38-3

Filed 12/12/2005

Page 2 of 2

The fact that you want to be "economical" in the use of your client's "resources" is not an adequate reason for this cancellation. Nothing has changed since the time that you noticed the depositions on November 22, 2005, except that the Commission has expended resources in that I have traveled to Delaware to meet my clients and prepare them for their depositions. By cancelling the depositions now, you will be wasting the Commission's "resources." If you do not proceed with the depositions this week, the Commission will seek reimbursement of its costs for my trip. Moreover, the four deponents have arranged their respective work schedules to attend their depositions as noticed. The Commission will seek reimbursement of their lost wages, also. It appears that you are not acting in good faith in the conduct of this litigation. Again, I request that you continue with the depositions, as scheduled. I will be in the office all day, today.

Sincerely,

M. Jean Clickner

cc:

Seth M. Beausang, AUSA

Page 2 of 2