EEOC v. Metro Special Police & Security Services, Inc.

Filing 32

ORDER denying as moot 24 Motion for Order to Show Cause; terminating 28 Memorandum and Recommendations. Signed by District Judge Robert J. Conrad, Jr on 7/8/2015. (tmg)

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF NORTH CAROLINA
CHARLOTTE DIVISION
3:13-cv-39-RJC-DCK
EEOC,
Plaintiff,
v.
METRO SPECIAL POLICE &
SECURITY SERVICES, INC.,
Defendant.

)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)

ORDER

THIS MATTER comes before the Court on Plaintiff’s “Motion to Show Cause Why
Defendant Should not Be Held in Contempt of Court,” (Doc. No. 24), and Supporting Brief,
(Doc. No. 25), Defendant’s Opposing Brief, (Doc. No. 26), Plaintiff’s Response, (Doc. No. 27),
the Magistrate Judge’s Memorandum and Recommendation (M&R), (Doc. No. 28), the
Plaintiff’s Objection to the M&R, (Doc. No. 29), and the Plaintiff’s Notice of Withdrawal, (Doc.
No. 31).
On December 3, 2014, the Plaintiff filed its Motion for Order to Show Cause, (Doc. No.
24). Plaintiff moved for the Court to order Defendant to show cause why it should not be held in
contempt for its failure to pay the individual complainants according to the Consent Decree,
(Doc. No. 23), entered on June 13, 2014. Following additional briefing by the parties, the
Magistrate Judge issued an M&R on January 21, 2015. In the M&R, the Magistrate Judge
recommended that Plaintiff’s Motion to Show Cause be denied. Plaintiff filed an Objection to the
M&R of the Magistrate Judge on February 9, 2015.
On May 27, 2015, the parties filed a Status Entry regarding Plaintiff’s Objection to the
M&R, notifying the Court that they had reached an agreement that Defendant would make
1

monetary payments to the individual claimants no later than June 1, 2015. On June 23, 2015, the
Plaintiff filed its Notice of Withdrawal, informing the Court that the Defendant made monetary
payments in compliance with the agreement on May 29, 2015, and that the Plaintiff was
withdrawing its objections to the M&R (Doc. No. 31 at 2). The Plaintiff’s Motion to Show Cause
is therefore DENIED as moot.
IT IS, THEREFORE, ORDERED that:
1.

Plaintiff’s Motion to Show Cause is DENIED AS MOOT.

2.

The Clerk of Court is directed to close this case.

Signed: July 8, 2015

2