Equal Employment Opportunity Commission v. Kaplan Higher Education Corporation
Plaintiff: Equal Employment Opportunity Commission
Defendant: Kaplan Higher Education Corporation
Case Number: 1:2010cv02882
Filed: December 21, 2010
Court: US District Court for the Northern District of Ohio
Office: Cleveland Office
County: Cuyahoga
Presiding Judge: Patricia A. Gaughan
Nature of Suit: Employment
Cause of Action: 42 U.S.C. ยง 2000
Jury Demanded By: None

Available Case Documents

The following documents for this case are available for you to view or download:

Date Filed Document Text
May 6, 2013 Opinion or Order Filing 127 Memorandum Opinion and Order: The EEOC's Revised Motion for Reconsideration and Incorporated Memorandum of Law is DENIED. Judge Patricia A. Gaughan on 5/6/13. (LC,S) re 120
January 28, 2013 Opinion or Order Filing 110 Memorandum Opinion and Order: Defendants' Motion for Summary Judgment (Doc. 79 ) and the Motion to Exclude the Reports and Testimony of Dr. Kevin R. Murphy (Doc. 82 ) are GRANTED. The EEOC's Motion for Partial Summary Judgment (Doc. 80 ) and Motion to Exclude Defendant's Expert Michael G. Aamodt (Doc. 90 ) are DENIED as MOOT. Judge Patricia A. Gaughan on 1/28/13. (LC,S)
April 18, 2012 Opinion or Order Filing 68 Memorandum Opinion and Order: Kaplan's Motion to Compel Production of Documents and Information and Rule 30(b)(6) Witness is granted. The EEOC must produce a Rule 30(b)(6) designee to testify as to the EEOC's position descriptions and how the position descriptions are assigned a risk level designation as requested in Topic 10. In addition, the EEOC must disclose to Kaplan information sufficient to identify the individuals the EEOC claims have been aggrieved by Kaplan's policies in this case. Judge Patricia A. Gaughan on 4/18/12. (LC,S) re 61
February 29, 2012 Opinion or Order Filing 57 Memorandum Opinion and Order: The EEOC's motion for leave to file an amended complaint naming Kaplan, Inc. and ICAC as defendants is granted. Judge Patricia A. Gaughan on 2/29/12. (LC,S) re 47
May 27, 2011 Opinion or Order Filing 31 Memorandum Opinion and Order: Defendant's Motion to Compel Rule 30(b)(6) Deposition is GRANTED. Plaintiff may assert applicable privileges during the deposition. Judge Patricia A. Gaughan on 5/26/11. (LC,S) re 20
May 10, 2011 Opinion or Order Filing 26 Memorandum Opinion and Order: Defendant's Partial Motion to Dismiss the Complaint is GRANTED. Judge Patricia A. Gaughan on 5/9/11. (LC,S) re 12
Access additional case information on PACER

Use the links below to access additional information about this case on the US Court's PACER system. A subscription to PACER is required.

Access this case on the Ohio Northern District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System

Search for this case: Equal Employment Opportunity Commission v. Kaplan Higher Education Corporation
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Defendant: Kaplan Higher Education Corporation
Represented By: Pamela Q. Devata
Represented By: Gerald L. Maatman, Jr.
Represented By: Steven J. Pearlman
Represented By: Jennifer A. Riley
Represented By: Brandon L. Spurlock
Represented By: Stephen S. Zashin
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Finance [ Google Finance | Yahoo Finance | Hoovers | SEC Edgar Filings ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Justia Dockets | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Plaintiff: Equal Employment Opportunity Commission
Represented By: John A. Henderson, Jr.
Represented By: Maria K. Boehringer
Represented By: Jeffrey A. Stern
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Finance [ Google Finance | Yahoo Finance | Hoovers | SEC Edgar Filings ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Justia Dockets | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]

Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.


Why Is My Information Online?