Free Statement of Material Facts - District Court of Connecticut - Connecticut

Case 8:03-cv—00376-SRU Document 28-2 Filed 06/18/2004 Page1 0f2
EXHIBIT A

( State of Connecticut
case 3:03-cv—OO37;6iSRU CGDi¤iMI8Si£D2B€2N Pmmmqaimwa Ai~FtagsP2>@f12IUNiTIES
QQ gg ,_t- ` i 1%7mmwmmBmgmmermm4QmnwsM6H¤@wHwe%0
rig :1. ·', __,-·i www.state.ct.us/chro
_ TDD (203) 579-6246
August 8, 2002
Adriano B. Branco
42 Stoneybrook Drive
Monroe, CT 06468
Dear Ms. Branco:
RE: COMPLAINT RETAINED FOR FULL INVESTIGATION
CASE #:0220337 Branco vs. Shaw’s Supermarket
EEOC#:16AA200972
Notice is hereby given that pursuant to C.G.S. 46a—83(b),
(formerly Public Act 94-238), the Commission has processed your
complaint through its Merit Assessment processes.
Further, you are hereby notified that as a result of these
activities, your complaint has been retained for the reason that
the initial merit assessment review revealed that the allegations
raised are such that they merit further investigation. Therefore,
your case has been assigned to Mary E. Moore. You will be advised
in the near fut ure as to the next process your complaint will
undergo.
During the interim, please take notice of the Commission's‘ ‘
Pre—determination Conciliation and Make Whole Relief processes.
These processes allow the parties to settle the complaint on terms
to their mutual benefit. The enclosed Notice explains both
processes. Also, enclosed is a pamphlet explaining the
Commissionis Alternate Dispute Resolution processes.
Very truly yours,
{ { ` I if {
Tanya H hes y»‘ ”
Region Manager ‘
Enclosure:ADR Brochure
General Notice — Pre Determination Conciliation
Make Whole Relief Processes
ck/ns
pc: Respondent: John Legan
Respondent's Attorney: William J. Anthony
Complainant's Attorney: n/a
FL4D'7 (1) Issued 3.2/94
Revised
Safeguarding Civil Rights in Connecticut
__ i- Affirmative Aotionl Equal Opportunity Employer