JUDGMENT
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY COMMISSION
PHILADELPHIA DISTRICT OFFICE
MELODY RODGERS § EEOC Case No. 530-2021-00005X
Complainant, § Agency No. 63-2020-00084-D
§
v. §
§ Administrative Judge:
GINA RAIMONDO, SECRETARY, § Natasha L. Abel
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE §
Agency. § Date:
COMPLAINANT’S RESPONSE TO AGENCY’S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT
NOW COMES Melody Rodgers, Complainant, and brings this Response to Agency’s Motion for Summary Judgment, and hereby avers as follows:
- In its motion, Agency lists lack of a genuine issue of material fact regarding the case brought by Complainant against Agency as a ground upon which this Court should grant Agency its Motion for Summary Judgment.
- Complainant contends that there is a genuine issue of material fact. In its motion, Agency has listed material facts as to which there is no genuine dispute.
- Complainant would like to show this Honorable Court that there is a genuine in the fact listed as No. 4 on the list of material facts. Agency stated as follows: “On or about October 11, 2019, Complainant failed to attend a Partnership Specialist training that was optional for experienced Specialists and required for new specialists. Complainant’s supervisor, Partnership Coordinator, Laura McClettie, called the Complainant on the morning of the training and Complainant stated that she would be there, however, she never attended the training.”
- Complainant submits that the training in question was optional and not compulsory. On 10/08/2019, Complainant received an email that stated in part as follows, “Partnership specialists who have had technology problems and/or would like refresher assistance/practice may join this training.”
- On 10/27/2019, Complainant received another email that stated in part as follows: “You are invited/encouraged to attend these events to observe/shadow.”
- The wording used in the first email is “MAY”. The word is not used compel someone to do something. It gives someone an option to do or not to do something. Agency gave Complainant the option to choose whether or not to attend refresher assistance/practice training. Agency did not make it compulsory for Complainant to attend.
- The wording used in the second email is “INVITED/ENCOURAGED TO ATTEND”. By use of this wording, Agency informed Complainant that there would be training and she would be allowed to attend. Encouraging her to attend meant that it would be optional for her to attend.
- Agency attempts to introduce parole evidence in the presence of emails sent to Complainant. Agency has not provided any proof of the conversation with Complainant.
- Complainant urges this Honorable Court not to consider any oral evidence brought by Agency. In Lenzi v Hahnemann Univ., 445 Pa. Super. 187, 195, 664 A.2d 1375, 1379 (1995), the Court stated as follows: “If a written contract is unambiguous and held to express the embodiment of all negotiations and agreements prior to its execution, neither oral testimony nor prior written agreements or other writings are admissible to explain or vary the terms of that contract.”
- In 1726 Cherry Street Partnerships v. Bell Atl. Props. Inc., 439 Pa. Super. 141, 146, 653 A.2d 663, 666 (1995), the Court held as follows: “In the absence of fraud, accident or mistake the alleged oral representations or agreements are merged in or superseded by the subsequent written contract, and parol evidence to vary, modify, or supersede the written contract is inadmissible in evidence.”
- In the emails sent to Complainant, there is no fraud, accident or mistake.
- Complainant has demonstrated that there is a genuine issue of material fact No. 4 in Agency’s list of material facts.
REASONS WHEREFORE, Complainant respectfully requests this Commission to deny Agency’s Motion for Summary Judgment.
Dated:
Respectfully Submitted,
______________________________
Melody J. Rodgers
2248 Kay Road
Greenville, NC 27858
704-968-6565
VERIFICATION
I, Melody J. Rodgers, being duly sworn depose and say that I am the Complainant in the above entitled action, that I have read the foregoing Response to Agency’s Motion for Summary Judgment and know the contents thereof. That the same is true of my own knowledge except as to those matters and things stated upon information and belief, and as to those things, I believe them to be true.
_________________________________
(Sign in the presence of a Notary Public)
Sworn to and subscribed before me this _____ day of ____________________, 2021.
______________________________
Notary Public
________________________________________
(Printed name of Notary Public)
My Commission Expires: ____________________
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
I hereby certify that a true and correct copy of the foregoing document was sent on the (Date) day of (Month) (Year) by regular U.S. mail, by facsimile, or certified mail, return receipt requested, to the following parties or attorneys of record:
Ashley Johnson, Attorney at Law
Attorney,
Employment and Labor Law Division
Office of the General Counsel
U.S. Department of Commerce
(301) 763-0381
(202) 436-0678
Dated:
Respectfully Submitted,
______________________________
Melody J. Rodgers
2248 Kay Road
Greenville, NC 27858
704-968-6565
At Legal writing experts, we would be happy to assist in preparing any legal document you need. We are international lawyers and attorneys with significant experience in legal drafting, Commercial-Corporate practice and consulting. In the last few years, we have successfully undertaken similar assignments for clients from different jurisdictions. If given this opportunity, The LegalPen will be able to prepare the legal document within the shortest time possible. You can send us your quick enquiry ( here )