Case 2:21-cv-07682-DSF-JEM Document 1 Filed 09/27/21 Page 1 of 7 Page ID #:1
`
`
`
`Anna Y. Park, SBN 164242
`anna.park@eeoc.gov
`Nakkisa Akhavan, SBN 236260
`nakkisa.akhavan@eeoc.gov
`Taylor Markey, SBN 319557
`taylor.markey@eeoc.gov
`U.S. EQUAL EMPLOYMENT
`OPPORTUNITY COMMISSION
`255 East Temple Street, Fourth Floor
`Los Angeles, CA 90012
`Telephone: (213) 422-8396
`Facsimile: (213) 894-1301
`E Mail: lado.legal@eeoc.gov
`
`Attorneys for Plaintiff
`U.S. EQUAL EMPLOYMENT
`OPPORTUNITY COMMISSION
`
`
`UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
`CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
`
`Case No.:
`
`COMPLAINT—TITLE VII
` Sexual Harassment
` Sex Discrimination (Pregnancy)
` Retaliation
`
`
`
`
`
`JURY TRIAL DEMAND
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Plaintiff,
`
`
`
`vs.
`
`
`
`Defendants.
`
`
`
`1
`
`1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
`
`10
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`23
`24
`25
`26
`27
`28
`
`
`)
`U.S. EQUAL EMPLOYMENT
`)
`OPPORTUNITY COMMISSION,
`)
`
`)
`
`)
`)
`
`)
`
`)
`
`)
`ACTIVISION BLIZZARD, INC., BLIZZARD
`)
`ENTERTAINMENT, INC., ACTIVISION
`)
`)
`PUBLISHING, INC., and KING.COM, INC.,
`)
`and DOES ONE through TEN, inclusive,
`)
`
`)
`
`)
`)
`
`
`NATURE OF THE ACTION
`
`This is an action under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and Title I of the Civil
`Rights Act of 1991 to correct unlawful employment practices based on sex and to provide
`appropriate relief to a class of individuals who were adversely affected by such practices. As set
`forth with greater particularity in paragraphs 1 to 26 of this Complaint, Plaintiff United States
`
`

`

`Case 2:21-cv-07682-DSF-JEM Document 1 Filed 09/27/21 Page 2 of 7 Page ID #:2
`
`
`
`Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (“Plaintiff” or “Commission”) alleges that there
`have been instances where Defendants Activision Blizzard, Inc., Blizzard Entertainment, Inc.,
`Activision Publishing, Inc., King.com, Inc., and their subsidiaries (“Defendants”) have subjected
`a class of individuals to sexual harassment, to pregnancy discrimination and/or to related
`retaliation under Title VII.
`
`
`JURISDICTION AND VENUE
`1.
`Jurisdiction of this Court is invoked pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §§ 451, 1331, 1337,
`1343 and 1345. This action is authorized and instituted pursuant to §§ 706(f)(1) and (3) of Title
`VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, as amended, 42 U.S.C. § 2000e-5(f)(1) and (3) (“Title VII”)
`and §102 of the Civil Rights Act of 1991, 42 U.S.C. § 1981a.
`2.
`The employment practices alleged to be unlawful cover Defendants’ California
`facilities and other locations throughout the U.S. Defendants have locations in Texas,
`Minnesota, New York, Wisconsin, and Arkansas.
`
`PARTIES
`3.
`Plaintiff is an agency of the United States of America charged with the
`administration, interpretation and enforcement of Title VII, and is expressly authorized to bring
`this action by §§ 706(f)(1) and (3), Title VII, 42 U.S.C. § 2000e-5(f)(1) and (3). The EEOC was
`created out of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and tasked by Congress to enforce federal anti-
`discrimination laws in employment.
`4.
`At all relevant times, Defendants have continuously been doing business in
`California and other locations throughout the United States.
`5.
`At all relevant times, Defendant Activision Blizzard, Inc. has continuously been a
`corporation doing business in the State of California, and continuously had at least 15 employees
`either jointly or directly.
`6.
`At all relevant times, Defendant Blizzard Entertainment, Inc. has continuously
`been a corporation doing business in the State of California, and continuously had at least 15
`
`1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
`
`10
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`23
`24
`25
`26
`27
`28
`
`
`
`2
`
`

`

`Case 2:21-cv-07682-DSF-JEM Document 1 Filed 09/27/21 Page 3 of 7 Page ID #:3
`
`
`
`employees.
`7.
`At all relevant times, Defendant Activision Publishing, Inc. has continuously been
`a corporation doing business in the State of California, and continuously had at least 15
`employees.
`8.
`At all relevant times, Defendant King.com, Inc. has continuously been a
`corporation doing business in the State of California, and continuously had at least 15
`employees.
`9.
`At all relevant times, Defendant Activision Blizzard, Inc. has continuously been
`an employer engaged in an industry affecting commerce within the meaning of Sections 701(b),
`(g), and (h) of Title VII, 42 U.S.C. §§ 2000e(b), (g), and (h).
`10.
`At all relevant times, Defendant Blizzard Entertainment, Inc. has continuously
`been an employer engaged in an industry affecting commerce within the meaning of Sections
`701(b), (g), and (h) of Title VII, 42 U.S.C. §§ 2000e(b), (g), and (h).
`11.
`At all relevant times, Defendant Activision Publishing, Inc. has continuously been
`an employer engaged in an industry affecting commerce within the meaning of Sections 701(b),
`(g), and (h) of Title VII, 42 U.S.C. §§ 2000e(b), (g), and (h).
`12.
`At all relevant times, King.com, Inc. has continuously been an employer engaged
`in an industry affecting commerce within the meaning of Sections 701(b), (g), and (h) of Title
`VII, 42 U.S.C. §§ 2000e(b), (g), and (h).
`13.
`All acts and failures to act alleged herein were duly performed by and attributable
`to all Defendants, each acting as a successor, agent, alter ego, employee, indirect employer, joint
`employer, integrated enterprise and/or or under the direction and control of the others, except as
`specifically alleged otherwise. Said acts and failures to act were within the scope of such agency
`and/or employment, and each Defendant participated in, approved and/or ratified the unlawful
`acts and omissions by the other Defendants complained of herein. Whenever and wherever
`reference is made in this Complaint to any act by a Defendant or Defendants, such allegations
`and reference shall also be deemed to mean the acts and failures to act of each Defendant acting
`individually, jointly, and/or severally.
`
`1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
`
`10
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`23
`24
`25
`26
`27
`28
`
`
`
`3
`
`

`

`Case 2:21-cv-07682-DSF-JEM Document 1 Filed 09/27/21 Page 4 of 7 Page ID #:4
`
`
`
`14.
`Plaintiff is ignorant of the true names and capacities of each defendant sued as
`DOES 1 through 10, inclusively, and therefore Plaintiff sues said defendants by fictitious names.
`Plaintiff reserves the right to amend the complaint to name each DOE defendant individually or
`corporately as it becomes known. Plaintiff alleges that each DOE defendant was in some manner
`responsible for the acts and omissions alleged herein and Plaintiff will amend the complaint to
`allege such responsibility when the same shall have been ascertained by Plaintiff.
`
`STATEMENT OF CLAIMS
`15. More than thirty days prior to the institution of this lawsuit, on September 26,
`2018, EEOC Commissioner Chai R. Feldblum signed Commissioner’s Charge Number 480-
`2018-05212, initiating the EEOC’s investigation into the following allegations, including but not
`limited to: “1. Subjecting female employees to sex-based discrimination, including harassment,
`based on their gender. 2. Retaliating against female employees for complaining about sex-based
`discrimination, based on their gender. 3. Paying female employees less than male employees,
`based on their gender.”
`16.
`Commission conducted an extensive investigation from September 26, 2018 to
`June 15, 2021 of the allegations of sexual harassment and related retaliation against Defendants
`and additional entities beyond the Charge, at their worksites in the United States. Defendants
`cooperated in the investigation by providing information, documents, and testimony of
`individuals necessary for the investigation.
`17.
`On June 15, 2021, the Commission issued to Defendants a Letter of
`Determination finding reasonable cause on the claims alleged in this Complaint.
`18.
`As required by statute, the Commission invited Defendants to engage in
`conciliation efforts to endeavor to eliminate the discriminatory practices and provide appropriate
`relief. The conciliation process is statutorily required for the EEOC to address the findings made
`in the Letter of Determination. The Commission engaged in extensive conciliation discussions
`with Defendants, but the Commission was unable to secure through informal methods an
`acceptable conciliation agreement.
`
`1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
`
`10
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`23
`24
`25
`26
`27
`28
`
`
`
`4
`
`

`

`Case 2:21-cv-07682-DSF-JEM Document 1 Filed 09/27/21 Page 5 of 7 Page ID #:5
`
`
`
`19.
`All conditions precedent to the institution of this lawsuit have been fulfilled.
`20.
`At all relevant times, Defendants have been a company that creates and distributes
`video games and other gaming-related content throughout the United States, with Activision
`Blizzard, Inc., and Activision Publishing, Inc.’s principal places of business in Santa Monica,
`CA and Blizzard Entertainment’s principal place of business in Irvine, CA.
`21.
`Since in or around September 2016, there have been instances where Defendants
`have engaged in unlawful employment practices in violation of §§ 701(k), 703(a) and 704(a) of
`Title VII, 42 U.S.C. 2000e-2(a) and 2000e-3(a) by subjecting a class of individuals to sexual
`harassment, to pregnancy discrimination and/or to retaliation.
`22.
`Employees were subjected sexual harassment that was severe or pervasive to alter
`the conditions of employment. The conduct was unwelcome and adversely affected the
`employees. The Defendants knew or should have known of the sexual harassment of the
`adversely affected employees.
`23.
`Some employees complained about the sexual harassment, but Defendants failed
`to take corrective and preventative measures. Once Defendants knew or should have known of
`the sexual harassment of the adversely affected employees, Defendants failed to take prompt and
`effective remedial action reasonably calculated to end the harassment.
`24.
`Defendants discriminated against employees due to their pregnancy that adversely
`affected the employees.
`25.
`Defendants retaliated against employees who engaged in activity protected by
`Title VII including, but not limited to, rejecting and/or complaining about sexual harassment
`and/or complaining about pregnancy discrimination. As a result of engaging in such protected
`activity, employees were subjected to adverse employment actions including discharge or
`constructive discharge.
`The unlawful employment practices complained of in paragraphs 20 to 25 above
`adversely affected employees to suffer damages including emotional distress.
`
`
`
`1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
`
`10
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`23
`24
`25
`26
`27
`28
`
`
`
`5
`
`

`

`Case 2:21-cv-07682-DSF-JEM Document 1 Filed 09/27/21 Page 6 of 7 Page ID #:6
`
`
`
`PRAYER FOR RELIEF
`Wherefore, the Commission respectfully requests that this Court:
`
`A.
`Grant a permanent injunction enjoining Defendant, their officers, successors,
`
`agents, servants, employees, attorneys, assigns, and all persons in active concert or participation
`with each of them, from engaging in sexual harassment, retaliation, and any other employment
`practices which discriminate based on sex, including pregnancy.
`
`B.
`Order Defendants to institute and carry out policies, practices, and programs to
`ensure equal employment opportunities, and which eradicate the effects of its past and present
`unlawful employment practices.
`
`C.
`Order Defendants to make the adversely affected employees whole by providing
`appropriate back pay with prejudgment interest, in amounts to be determined at trial, and other
`affirmative relief necessary to eradicate the effects of its unlawful employment practices,
`including but not limited to back pay, reinstatement, or front pay in lieu thereof.
`
`D.
`Order Defendants to make the adversely affected employee whole by providing
`compensation for past and future pecuniary losses, including but not limited to out-of-pocket
`expenses suffered by them which resulted from the unlawful employment practices described
`above in the amounts to be determined at trial.
`
`E.
`Order Defendants to make the adversely affected employees whole by providing
`compensation for non-pecuniary losses resulting from the unlawful employment practices
`described above in amounts to be determined at trial.
`
`F.
`Grant such further relief as the Court deems necessary and proper in the public
`interest.
`//
`//
`//
`//
`//
`//
`
`1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
`
`10
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`23
`24
`25
`26
`27
`28
`
`
`
`6
`
`

`

`OoNYDnur&_WNYOKFCOODOWNDnne&_WNYOKFO&O Case 2:21-cv-07682-DSF-JEM Document1 Filed 09/27/21 Page 7of7 Page
`
`EQUAL
`OPPORTUNITY COMMISSION
`131 “M”Street, N.E.
`D.C. 20507
`Washington,
`
`Case 2:21-cv-07682-DSF-JEM Document 1 Filed 09/27/21 Page 7 of 7 Page ID #:7
`ID#:
`
`JURY TRIAL DEMAND
`
`The Commission requests
`
`a
`
`jury
`
`trial on all
`
`questions
`
`of fact raised by its
`
`Complaint.
`
`Dated: 09-27-2021
`
`Respectfully Submitted,
`
`GWENDOLYN YOUNG REAMS,
`Acting General Counsel
`
`vu&_WYVY
`oOowonn
`
`OoNONYWNNYNYNYNONOFFFFFFFEOFOREOOOO
`
`U.S.
`
`EMPLOYMENT
`
`By:
`
`AGS
`
`ANNAY. PARK
`
`Regional Attorney
`Los
`Angeles District Office
`U.S.
`EMPLOYMENT
`EQUAL
`OPPORTUNITY COMMISSION
`
`