Page 1
Case 3:23-cv-04984-JSC
Document 73
Filed 12/05/24
ROBERTA L. STEELE, SBN 188198 (CA) MARCIA L. MITCHELL, SBN 18122 (WA) JAMES H. BAKER JR, SBN 291836 (CA) KENA C. CADOR, SBN 321094 (CA) MARIKO M. ASHLEY, SBN 311897 (CA) U.S. EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY COMMISSION San Francisco District Office 450 Golden Gate Ave., 5th Floor West P.O. Box 36025 San Francisco, CA 94102 Telephone No. (650) 684-0950 Fax No. (415) 522-3425 james.baker@eeoc.gov
Attorneys for Plaintiff EEOC
CHRISTINA T. TELLADO, SBN 298597 (CA) MARY VU, SBN 323088 (CA) POLSINELLI LLP 20249 Century Park East Suite 2900 Los Angeles, CA 90067 Telephone (310)-556-1801 Fax No. (310)-556-1802 ttellado@polsinelli.com mvu@polsinelli.com
Attorneys for Defendant TESLA, INC. (Additional counsel listed on next page)
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
U.S. EQUAL EMPLOYMENT
OPPORTUNITY COMMISSION,
Plaintiff,
Page 1 of 6
vs.
Case No.: 3:23-cv-04984-JSC SECOND UPDATED JOINT CASE MANAGEMENT CONFERENCE STATEMENT
TESLA, INC.
Defendant.
2ND UPDATED JT CASE MANAGEMENT CONFERENCE STATEMENT
Case No.: 3:23-cv-04984-JSC
Page 2
Case 3:23-cv-04984-JSC
Document 73
TYREE P. JONES JR., SBN 127631 (CA) POLSINELLI 1401 I Street, N.W., Washington, DC 2005-3317 Telephone No. (202) 783-3300 tjones@polsinelli.com
Attorneys for Defendant TESLA, INC.
Page 2 of 6
SARA A. BEGLEY (admitted pro hac vice) DANA E. FEINSTEIN (admitted pro hac vice) POLSINELLI LLP Three Logan Square 1717 Arch St, Suite 2800 Philadelphia, PA 19103 Telephone: 215-267-3001 Facsimile: 215-267-3002 sbegley@polsinelli.com dfeinstein@polsinelli.com
RAYMOND A. CARDOZO, SBN 173263 (CA) REED SMITH LLP 101 Second Street, Suite 1800 San Francisco, California 94105-3659 Telephone No. (415) 543-8700 Fax No. (415) 391-8269 rcardozo@reedsmith.com
Filed 12/05/24
2ND UPDATED JT CASE MANAGEMENT CONFERENCE STATEMENT
Case No.: 3:23-cv-04984-JSC
Page 3
Case 3:23-cv-04984-JSC
Document 73
Filed 12/05/24
Page 3 of 6
Pursuant to the Court’s Pretrial Order No. 1 (ECF 65), Plaintiff U.S. Equal Employment
Opportunity Commission (EEOC) and Defendant Tesla, Inc. (Tesla), (collectively, the parties),
hereby submit the following Updated Joint Case Management Conference Statement (CMC
Statement). In accordance with the Court’s Pretrial Order No. 2 and Civil Standing Order this CMC
Statement only addresses new issues. See ECF 65; Civil Standing Order at 2, Section E.
1.
Motions
There are no pending motions, though the parties are continuing to meet and confer on
discovery disputes that they anticipate will be submitted to the Court in Discovery Dispute Letters,
summarized below in Section 3 (Discovery).
2.
Evidence Preservation
The parties are negotiating their proposed Supplemental ESI Protocol which is due to be filed
by December 6, 2024. See ECF 71. It is unclear whether there will be outstanding disputes to submit
to the Court as Tesla’s proposed revisions to the EEOC’s November 22, 2024 draft are still pending
as of the timing of this filing. The Supplemental ESI Protocol will address issues of evidence
preservation, including ESI sources and relevant custodians, as well as document searches and
review, and privilege log exclusions.
3.
Discovery a.
Status The parties exchanged their first rounds of formal discovery, including requests for
production and interrogatories.
On December 2, 2024, in accordance with the parties’ Protocol to Limit Discovery for
Potentially Aggrieved Individuals (ECF 67-68), the EEOC and Tesla each identified 10 potentially
aggrieved individuals (20 total) for whom they will disclose certain information as defined by the
protocol. The parties’ disclosures for these identified PAIs are due March 3, 2024.
Tesla stated at the parties’ December 3 meet and confer video conference that it may need
additional information from the EEOC to identify certain individuals in its HRIS systems who have
informed the EEOC of their desire to seek legal advice and assistance from the EEOC in connection
with this case (Potential Aggrieved Individuals). See EEOC-Tesla_0039837-60. Tesla clarified
2ND UPDATED JT CASE MANAGEMENT
CONFERENCE STATEMENT
Case No.: 3:23-cv-04984-JSC
Page 4
Case 3:23-cv-04984-JSC
Document 73
Filed 12/05/24
Page 4 of 6
information it is requesting from the EEOC by correspondence sent on December 5, 2024, and the
EEOC will provide its response to Tesla’s request, after which the parties will meet and confer as
needed. The parties will continue to meet and confer to try to resolve these issues without Court
intervention. The parties will be better positioned to assess the efficacy of this protocol and the need
for any other changes to the standard discovery rules after this first round of disclosures.
b. Pending Discovery Disputes
i. Identifying Information Concerning Black Employees (Employee List)
On September 24, 2024, the EEOC issued an Interrogatory pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 33,
for identifying information for Black employees at Tesla’s Fremont Facility. The parties met and
conferred regarding when Tesla would produce the employee list and other disputes concerning
Tesla’s response to the Interrogatory on November 5, 2024, and December 3, 2024. On December 5,
2024, Tesla produced documents in Relativity format that it states includes a contact list containing
names, dates of employment, last known home address, last known email address, last known
telephone number, last known job title, last known supervisor, last known job family, last known job
function, and separation reason (if applicable) for all Black/African American employees at its
Fremont, California factory from May 29, 2015 to May 13, 2024. Tesla’s production at 4:00 pm
December 5, 2024 was in Relativity format, which the EEOC will need to load into the platform to
assess for completeness. Tesla committed to supplement its contact list with the remaining historical
job title and supervisor data that it is currently in the process of collecting, and the EEOC seeks a
date certain for providing this information, which will enable the EEOC to focus its identification of
Potentially Aggrieved Individuals. The parties are finalizing a discovery dispute letter which will be
filed no later than Friday, December 6, addressing (1) whether Tesla must produce all identifying
information for its Black employees that EEOC requested, specifically the last 4 digits of each
person’s SSN, and birthdate, to which requests Tesla objected; and (2) a deadline for Tesla to give
the EEOC a date certain by which it will identify each Black employee’s historical supervisors,
departments, and job titles.
2ND UPDATED JT CASE MANAGEMENT
CONFERENCE STATEMENT
Case No.: 3:23-cv-04984-JSC
Page 5
Case 3:23-cv-04984-JSC
Document 73
Filed 12/05/24
Page 5 of 6
ii. EEOC Communications with plaintiffs in Department of Fair Employment and Housing v. Tesla, Inc., Alameda County Superior Court No. 22CV006830, and Vaughn, et al. v. Tesla, Inc., et al., Alameda County Superior Court No. RG 17882082
The parties met and conferred on December 3, 2024, regarding EEOC’s objections to Tesla’s
request to produce all certain communications between the EEOC, the California Civil Rights
Department, and private plaintiffs’ counsel in the aforementioned cases, and to log all privileged
communications re: same. Counsel are preparing a discovery dispute regarding this disagreement to
be submitted after the EEOC has an opportunity to respond to the draft dispute letter it received on
December 5, 2024.
iii. Deposition transcripts in actions concerning race harassment at Fremont Facility.
On December 5, 2024, the EEOC requested to meet and confer with Tesla regarding its
objections to the EEOC’s request to produce deposition transcripts in Department of Fair
Employment and Housing v. Tesla, Inc., Alameda County Superior Court No. 22CV006830; and
Vaughn et al., v. Tesla, Inc., et al., Alameda County Superior Court No. RG 17882082, as well as
other actions raising allegations of harassment based on race (Black or African American) or
retaliation at Tesla’s Fremont facility. After the parties meet and confer and Tesla learns the
substance of the EEOC’s concern and has an opportunity to respond to same, this issue will be
submitted to the Court in a discovery dispute letter, if necessary.
4.
Settlement and ADR The parties’ position that ADR is premature has not changed. The deadline for the parties to
select an ADR process is May 26, 2025. See ECF 65.
5.
Privilege The parties are continuing to negotiate whether certain categories of documents need not be
included on a privilege log. If the parties agree, these stipulations will be detailed in their Supplemental ESI Protocol.
Dated: December 5, 2024
ROBERTA STEELE
Regional Attorney
KARLA GILBRIDE
General Counsel
MARCIA L. MITCHELL
CHRISTOPHER LAGE
2ND UPDATED JT CASE MANAGEMENT
CONFERENCE STATEMENT
Case No.: 3:23-cv-04984-JSC
Page 6
Case 3:23-cv-04984-JSC Document 73 Filed 12/05/24 Page 6 of6 Assistant Regional Trial Attorney Deputy General Counsel JAMES H. BAKER Office of the General Counsel Senior Trial Attorney 131 M Street, N.E. Washington, D.C. 20507 | KENAC. CADOR Senior Trial Attorney MARIKO M. ASHLEY Senior Trial Attorney BY: _/s/ James H. Baker James H. Baker
U.S. EQUAL EMPLOYMENT
OPPORTUNITY COMMISSION
San Francisco District Office 450 Golden Gate Ave., 5th Floor West P.O. Box 36025 San Francisco, CA 94102 Telephone (650) 684-0950 Ul james. baker@eeoc. gov D Attorneys for Plaintiff EEOC BY: _/s/ Tyree P. Jones Jr.
Tyree P. Jones Jr., SBN 127631 (CA) POLSINELLI 1401 I Street, N.W., Washington, DC 2005-3317 Telephone No. (202) 783-3300 Attorneys for Defendant Tesla Inc.
LOCAL RULE 5-1(i)(3) ATTESTATION I, James H. Baker, am the ECF User whose ID and password are being used to file the Joint Case Management Conference Statement. In compliance with Local Rule 5-1(1)(3), I hereby attest | that Tyree P. Jones concurs in this filing. Dated: December 5, 2024 /s/ James H. Baker James H. Baker, Senior Trial Attorney
2ND UPDATED JT CASE MANAGEMENT 6 CONFERENCE STATEMENT Case No.: 3:23-cv-04984-JSC
Back to 
