IPI ordered to explain why it shouldn’t be cited for contempt

Share

The U.S. District Court for the NMI has ordered Imperial Pacific International (CNMI) LLC to appear in court today to explain why it should not be found in contempt for its alleged incompliance with the consent decree to pay former employees who claim they were sexually harassed while they were working for the company.

Chief Judge Ramona Manglona ordered IPI to appear before the court today to show cause as to why it should not be held in contempt of court for violating the April 27, 2021, consent decree with the U.S Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, and why it should not be ordered to purge itself of contempt.

“According to EEOC, Imperial Pacific International (CNMI) LLC [and] Imperial Pacific International Holdings Limited have not complied with the April 27, 2021, consent decree. Specifically, the EEOC alleges that to date defendants have only made the first three monthly payments and have been delinquent in making the August and September payments. According to counsel for the EEOC, he has contacted defendants’ counsel on numerous occasions, both in writing and telephonically, but has not secured defendants’ compliance with the consent decree. For good cause shown, the court orders that IPI appear before the court,” Manglona said.

In EEOC’s motion to find IPI in contempt, to EEOC counsel Eric Yau said that IPI violated a specific and definite order of the court when it failed to fully comply with its obligations concerning monetary relief required in the decree.

“Specifically, Imperial Pacific was obligated to pay a total of $105,000 to claimants. To date, defendants have only paid $60,000, and have been delinquent with the monthly payment of $15,000 for August and September,” Yau stated.

The EEOC sued IPI on Sept. 24, 2019, for sexual harassment and unfair employment practices on behalf of a former VIP hostess and other female employees. EEOC alleged that IPI subjected the claimants to unwelcome physical and verbal sexual harassment by male patrons.

IPI denied all the allegations and asked the court to rule in its favor and dismiss the complaint with prejudice.
In April 2021, IPI agreed to settle the claims and resolve the lawsuit. It entered into a consent decree that was approved by the court on April 27, 2021.

Kimberly B. Esmores | Reporter
Kimberly Albiso Bautista has covered a wide range of news beats, including the community, housing, crime, and more. She now covers sports for the Saipan Tribune. Contact her at kimberly_bautista@saipantribune.com.

Related Posts

Disclaimer: Comments are moderated. They will not appear immediately or even on the same day. Comments should be related to the topic. Off-topic comments would be deleted. Profanities are not allowed. Comments that are potentially libelous, inflammatory, or slanderous would be deleted.