1 20 11 https://digital.library.utahtech.edu/files/original/2fab475b229b1793a1e9b7fe24ced42a.pdf 62aa80c245a1af5f67c3f39b6a5d3393 PDF Text Text ����!"ÿ$%&&ÿ'( )*ÿ+,-./01)%ÿ2345./6ÿ7186ÿ9:1-,;1<.ÿ=/81-ÿ>/?-@,.ÿ=A>>A?,<Bÿ)C@?11<,1)ÿ9:/<0"ÿ/>>1B/.,A<-ÿA=ÿ+,-8A<;@8.ÿDÿE1?-ÿDÿ-.B1A:B1@./6F8A+ 01ÿ34567890ÿ �67�ÿ�9��ÿ��954�9�6ÿ�7�95ÿ�7�5�46 ������4��ÿ0���99�490ÿ��7�8�ÿ7��9�764��5ÿ��ÿ345������6 6..9-%��???F-.B1A:B1@./6F8A+�<1?-�/4+,-./014134@./64.18649:1-,;1<.4=/81-4>/?-@,.4=A>>A?,<B4C@?11<,149:/<04/>>1B/.,A<-4A=4+,-8A<;@8.�/:.,8>1G/HIJ&K &�� �0101234ÿ6788ÿ9 ÿ ������7ÿ�������ÿ����ÿ���������ÿ�����ÿ�!�"��ÿ�##!��$ÿ%"!�����ÿ�����4ÿ��$���#��ÿ#�ÿ ���#��"��ÿ&ÿ'�!�ÿ&ÿ��$�#�$�"���(�# �����711!!!(��$�#�$�"���(�# 1��!�1�� ����������"��������������������������!�"����##!��$�%"!��������������$���#���#�� ���#��"��1������)�*+,8- 210 �0101234ÿ6788ÿ9 ÿ ������7ÿ�������ÿ����ÿ���������ÿ�����ÿ�!�"��ÿ�##!��$ÿ%"!�����ÿ�����4ÿ��$���#��ÿ#�ÿ ���#��"��ÿ&ÿ'�!�ÿ&ÿ��$�#�$�"���(�# �����711!!!(��$�#�$�"���(�# 1��!�1�� ����������"��������������������������!�"����##!��$�%"!��������������$���#���#�� ���#��"��1������)�*+,8- 610 �0101234ÿ6788ÿ9 ÿ ������7ÿ�������ÿ����ÿ���������ÿ�����ÿ�!�"��ÿ�##!��$ÿ%"!�����ÿ�����4ÿ��$���#��ÿ#�ÿ ���#��"��ÿ&ÿ'�!�ÿ&ÿ��$�#�$�"���(�# �����711!!!(��$�#�$�"���(�# 1��!�1�� ����������"��������������������������!�"����##!��$�%"!��������������$���#���#�� ���#��"��1������)�*+,8- +10 �0101234ÿ6788ÿ9 ÿ ������7ÿ�������ÿ����ÿ���������ÿ�����ÿ�!�"��ÿ�##!��$ÿ%"!�����ÿ�����4ÿ��$���#��ÿ#�ÿ ���#��"��ÿ&ÿ'�!�ÿ&ÿ��$�#�$�"���(�# �����711!!!(��$�#�$�"���(�# 1��!�1�� ����������"��������������������������!�"����##!��$�%"!��������������$���#���#�� ���#��"��1������)�*+,8- 310 �0101234ÿ6788ÿ9 ÿ ������7ÿ�������ÿ����ÿ���������ÿ�����ÿ�!�"��ÿ�##!��$ÿ%"!�����ÿ�����4ÿ��$���#��ÿ#�ÿ ���#��"��ÿ&ÿ'�!�ÿ&ÿ��$�#�$�"���(�# �����711!!!(��$�#�$�"���(�# 1��!�1�� ����������"��������������������������!�"����##!��$�%"!��������������$���#���#�� ���#��"��1������)�*+,8- .10 �0101234ÿ6788ÿ9 ÿ ������7ÿ�������ÿ����ÿ���������ÿ�����ÿ�!�"��ÿ�##!��$ÿ%"!�����ÿ�����4ÿ��$���#��ÿ#�ÿ ���#��"��ÿ&ÿ'�!�ÿ&ÿ��$�#�$�"���(�# �����711!!!(��$�#�$�"���(�# 1��!�1�� ����������"��������������������������!�"����##!��$�%"!��������������$���#���#�� ���#��"��1������)�*+,8- .10 �0101234ÿ6788ÿ9 ÿ ������7ÿ�������ÿ����ÿ���������ÿ�����ÿ�!�"��ÿ�##!��$ÿ%"!�����ÿ�����4ÿ��$���#��ÿ#�ÿ ���#��"��ÿ&ÿ'�!�ÿ&ÿ��$�#�$�"���(�# �����711!!!(��$�#�$�"���(�# 1��!�1�� ����������"��������������������������!�"����##!��$�%"!��������������$���#���#�� ���#��"��1������)�*+,8- 010 � Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Identifier An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context UTULawsuit2024 Title A name given to the resource UTU Institutional History: Title IX Lawsuit Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource UTU Special Collections and Archives Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource 2024-2025 Description An account of the resource This collection brings together various media pertaining to the Title IX Federal lawsuit against Utah Tech University and former UTU President Richard "Biff" Williams. Included are news articles, Federal Court documents, and UTU President Shane Smeed Email Message, which in part addresses the ongoing issues and culture of the UTU campus. Those seeking more court documents can research at the Federal Court House in Salt Lake City, or by using the online case search database, <a href="https://pacer.psc.uscourts.gov/pscof/registration.jsf">PACER</a>. Format The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource application/PDF Type The nature or genre of the resource Text Language A language of the resource Eng Subject The topic of the resource Title IX Government Documents Biff Williams Rights Information about rights held in and over the resource <ol> <li>News articles are <a href="https://rightsstatements.org/page/InC-EDU/1.0/?language=en">In Copyright-Educational Use Only</a>.</li> <li>UTU Presidential email is public record.</li> <li>Federal court documents are public record.</li> </ol> Rights Holder A person or organization owning or managing rights over the resource. Sun News (news articles) St. George News (news articles) Salt Lake Tribune Is Format Of A related resource that is substantially the same as the described resource, but in another format. Born Digital Extent The size or duration of the resource. 8 MB Source A related resource from which the described resource is derived District Court of Utah PACER Court records database Email List to Employees of Utah Tech University St. George News  Salt Lake Tribune Sun News  Sun News Publisher An entity responsible for making the resource available St George News Sun News Salt Lake Tribune Utah Tech University Federal District Court for Utah Medium The material or physical carrier of the resource. Born Digital Provenance A statement of any changes in ownership and custody of the resource since its creation that are significant for its authenticity, integrity, and interpretation. The statement may include a description of any changes successive custodians made to the resource. UTU Special Collections Staff donation August 2025. Is Part Of A related resource in which the described resource is physically or logically included. Collection UA077 UTU Institutional History. Text A resource consisting primarily of words for reading. Examples include books, letters, dissertations, poems, newspapers, articles, archives of mailing lists. Note that facsimiles or images of texts are still of the genre Text. Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Identifier An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context UA077_TitleIX-04 Title A name given to the resource "A Mistake": Ex-Utah Tech President Faces Lawsuit Following "Zuweenie" Prank, Allegations of Misconduct Subject The topic of the resource Academic Life Chief Academic Officer Controversy Description An account of the resource Biff Williams offers an apology for the prank that lead to the current Title IX lawsuit against UTU along with his own resignation Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource 2024-11-12 Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Kessler, Mori Publisher An entity responsible for making the resource available St. George News Bibliographic Citation A bibliographic reference for the resource. Recommended practice is to include sufficient bibliographic detail to identify the resource as unambiguously as possible. Kessler, Mor. (2024, Nov 12). "'A mistake': Ex-Utah Tech president faces lawsuit following 'zuweenie' prank, allegations of misconduct." St. George News, https://www.stgeorgeutah.com/news/a-mistake-ex-utah-tech-president-faces-lawsuit-following-zuweenie-prank-allegations-of-misconduct/article_ab401e84-a09e-11ef-b09a-6f5bb5610061.html Format The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource application/PDF Type The nature or genre of the resource Text Language A language of the resource Eng Rights Information about rights held in and over the resource IN COPYRIGHT-EDUCATIONAL USE PERMITTED Medium The material or physical carrier of the resource. Born Digital Extent The size or duration of the resource. 2.2 MB Is Part Of A related resource in which the described resource is physically or logically included. UA077: UTU Institutional History Source A related resource from which the described resource is derived Utah Tech University Special Collections and Archives. Server/Digital Collections/UA 077 Institutional History https://digital.library.utahtech.edu/files/original/ee8ac7d7f81393a735fe895208576d97.pdf 9f44eabfb6d6b63dce8bbac80282fbcf PDF Text Text From: Sent: To: Subject: President Smeed <president@utahtech.edu> Friday, July 25, 2025 11:32 AM UT Official Cabinet Updates Dear Campus Community, I hope this message finds you enjoying your summer. As always, I want to thank you for your dedication to Utah Tech University. As part of my ongoing commitment to communicate to you with clarity, transparency, and timeliness, today I am pleased to share several exciting personnel and structural updates to our cabinet leadership team. Several of our colleagues are stepping into new or expanded roles, and I want to take a moment to lift up their contributions and express my support as they take on these responsibilities. First, after an extensive national search, I have selected Natalie Nelson as Utah Tech University's next General Counsel. Natalie brings exceptional legal acumen and institutional knowledge to this role. Her career includes service as a Deputy Washington County Attorney and, most recently, as the Education Division Director for the Utah Attorney General's Office. In that capacity, she led the public and higher education legal teams and served as Utah Tech’s designated Assistant Attorney General, gaining deep familiarity with our campus. Her understanding of higher education law, combined with her commitment to service, makes her an ideal fit for this critical position. Second, I’m pleased to announce that Brad Last has accepted a new role as Special Assistant to the President for Government and Community Relations. In this part-time role, Brad will draw upon his extensive public service experience to strengthen our relationships with local, state, and federal partners, including representing Utah Tech during the 2026 general legislative session. As part of this transition, Brad 1 �will be stepping down from his current position as Vice President for University Advancement. I want to express my appreciation for Brad’s leadership over the past 12 years. During this time, Utah Tech has significantly expanded its fundraising and alumni relations footprint. In total, giving has increased each of the past five years and has doubled since 2020—an extraordinary achievement. Beyond his contributions to fundraising, Brad’s influence has been vital to the university's success. His steady leadership and infectious personality have transformed our campus and its people. We will immediately launch a national search for the next Vice President for University Advancement, and Brad will move into his new role once that individual is selected. Third, I have appointed Henrie Walton as Utah Tech University’s next Chief of Staff. Henrie will lead the President’s Office team and serve as Secretary to the Board of Trustees. He has served in the interim role since January 2024 while also leading our government and community relations efforts. I’m grateful for his steady leadership and advocacy on behalf of Utah Tech. During his tenure as Assistant to the President for Government and Community Relations, Henrie helped secure critical funding for new academic programs, faculty and staff positions and compensation increases, and major infrastructure projects. As part of this transition, our talented team at the Office of Institutional Effectiveness, which had previously been housed in the President’s Office, will now be part of the Administrative Affairs Division. I look forward to Henrie’s continued leadership in this expanded role. In alignment with my commitment to our people and culture, I have also decided to elevate the previously open position of Executive Director of Human Resources to a cabinet-level role. This position will now be titled Chief Human Resources Officer (CHRO) and will report directly to the President. I want to thank Travis Rosenberg for his dedicated and exemplary service as Executive Director over the past decade and Paul Morris for his stewardship of the department. As we look ahead to our upcoming strategic plan, the elevation of this role signals that developing talent and building a culture of respect and collaboration will be a central focus. I’m excited to work alongside Natalie, Brad, and Henrie in their new capacities. As I’ve shared before, people and culture are paramount to our success—and I believe these personnel and structural adjustments reflect our continued commitment to both. Please be on the lookout for additional positive organizational developments in the coming weeks and months. Together, we will advance Utah Tech’s mission while fostering a workplace culture grounded in excellence, respect, and trust. Sincerely, President Shane Smeed Utah Tech University | 225 S 700 E | Saint George, UT 84770 US Unsubscribe | Update Profile | Constant Contact Data Notice 2 � Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Identifier An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context UTULawsuit2024 Title A name given to the resource UTU Institutional History: Title IX Lawsuit Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource UTU Special Collections and Archives Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource 2024-2025 Description An account of the resource This collection brings together various media pertaining to the Title IX Federal lawsuit against Utah Tech University and former UTU President Richard "Biff" Williams. Included are news articles, Federal Court documents, and UTU President Shane Smeed Email Message, which in part addresses the ongoing issues and culture of the UTU campus. Those seeking more court documents can research at the Federal Court House in Salt Lake City, or by using the online case search database, <a href="https://pacer.psc.uscourts.gov/pscof/registration.jsf">PACER</a>. Format The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource application/PDF Type The nature or genre of the resource Text Language A language of the resource Eng Subject The topic of the resource Title IX Government Documents Biff Williams Rights Information about rights held in and over the resource <ol> <li>News articles are <a href="https://rightsstatements.org/page/InC-EDU/1.0/?language=en">In Copyright-Educational Use Only</a>.</li> <li>UTU Presidential email is public record.</li> <li>Federal court documents are public record.</li> </ol> Rights Holder A person or organization owning or managing rights over the resource. Sun News (news articles) St. George News (news articles) Salt Lake Tribune Is Format Of A related resource that is substantially the same as the described resource, but in another format. Born Digital Extent The size or duration of the resource. 8 MB Source A related resource from which the described resource is derived District Court of Utah PACER Court records database Email List to Employees of Utah Tech University St. George News  Salt Lake Tribune Sun News  Sun News Publisher An entity responsible for making the resource available St George News Sun News Salt Lake Tribune Utah Tech University Federal District Court for Utah Medium The material or physical carrier of the resource. Born Digital Provenance A statement of any changes in ownership and custody of the resource since its creation that are significant for its authenticity, integrity, and interpretation. The statement may include a description of any changes successive custodians made to the resource. UTU Special Collections Staff donation August 2025. Is Part Of A related resource in which the described resource is physically or logically included. Collection UA077 UTU Institutional History. Text A resource consisting primarily of words for reading. Examples include books, letters, dissertations, poems, newspapers, articles, archives of mailing lists. Note that facsimiles or images of texts are still of the genre Text. Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Identifier An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context UA077_TitleIX-10 Title A name given to the resource Cabinet Updates Subject The topic of the resource Academic Life Office of the President Description An account of the resource President Shane Smeed offers email updates for UTU an addresses some of the recent controverses that took place on the UTU campus. Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource 2025-07-25 Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Smeed, Shane Publisher An entity responsible for making the resource available Utah Tech University, Office of the President Bibliographic Citation A bibliographic reference for the resource. Recommended practice is to include sufficient bibliographic detail to identify the resource as unambiguously as possible. Last Name, First Name [or Entity Name]. (Date). “Title”. Collection Identifier, Box #, Folder #. Utah Tech University Special Collections & Archives, URL link. Format The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource application/PDF Type The nature or genre of the resource Text Language A language of the resource Eng Rights Information about rights held in and over the resource Public domain in the United States Medium The material or physical carrier of the resource. Born Digital Extent The size or duration of the resource. 298 KB Is Part Of A related resource in which the described resource is physically or logically included. UA077: UTU Institutional History Source A related resource from which the described resource is derived Utah Tech University Special Collections and Archives. Server/Digital Collections/UA 077 Institutional History https://digital.library.utahtech.edu/files/original/3e64be4f0b316399cf483a4f7b4b44dc.pdf 0590c680d120bfba2a86f22bd3d4bb89 PDF Text Text Case 4:24-cv-00091-DN-PK Document 2 Filed 11/07/24 PageID.2 Page 1 of 42 Lisa R. Petersen (7598) Amy L. Herrington (18695) COHNE KINGHORN, P.C. 111 East Broadway, 11th Floor Salt Lake City, Utah 84111 Telephone: (801) 363-4300 Facsimile: (801) 363-4378 Email: lpetersen@ck.law aherrington@ck.law Attorneys for Plaintiffs IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF UTAH, SOUTHERN REGION REBECCA BROADBENT, JARED RASBAND, AND HAZEL SAINSBURY, Plaintiffs, v. RICHARD “BIFF” WILLIAMS, JORDON SHARP, DEL BEATTY, MICHAEL LACOURSE, HENRIE WALTON, TIFFANY WILSON, UTAH TECH UNIVERSITY, GEOFF LANDWARD, UTAH BOARD OF HIGHER EDUCATION, UTAH SYSTEM OF HIGHER EDUCATION, THE OFFICE OF THE COMMISSIONER OF HIGHER EDUCATION, ALISON ADAMS, ERIC PEDERSEN, MATT BLACK, JYL HALL, JARED MADSEN, STACY SCHMIDT, BROOKE ULRICH, TRAVIS ROSENBERG, and COURTNEY WHITE. JOHN AND JANE DOES I-X Defendants. COMPLAINT Civil No. 4:24-cv-00091-DN Judge: David Nuffer JURY DEMAND �Case 4:24-cv-00091-DN-PK Document 2 Filed 11/07/24 PageID.3 Page 2 of 42 Plaintiffs Rebecca Broadbent, Hazel Sainsbury, and Jared Rasband (collectively, “Plaintiffs”), by and through counsel, hereby complain and allege against Defendants Richard “Biff” Williams, Jordon Sharp, Del Beatty, Michael Lacourse, Henrie Walton, Tiffany Wilson, Utah Tech University (“Utah Tech” or the “University”), Geoff Landward, Utah Board of Higher Education, Utah System of Higher Education, the Office of the Commissioner of Higher Education, Alison Adams, Eric Pedersen, Matt Black, Jyl Hall, Jared Madsen, Stacy Schmidt, Brooke Ulrich, Travis Rosenberg, and Courtney White (collectively, “Defendants”) as follows: NATURE OF THE CASE 1. This case centers on a public university, Utah Tech University, that has continuously and openly flouted the protections of Title IX. Plaintiffs, in their respective capacities within Utah Tech’s offices of general counsel and Title IX, worked hard to establish an environment free from harassment and discrimination. Yet in doing so, they faced resistance, intimidation, harassment, and retaliation from Utah Tech’s highest leaders. This pushback culminated in a sexual and obscene visual display presented at the home of a University vice president and attributed to the Plaintiffs by then-President of Utah Tech, “Biff” Williams. Worse, Utah Tech followed this obscenity with a sham investigation, cover up, and derogation of Plaintiffs’ grievances, while the institution’s governing bodies, the Utah System of Higher Education, the Utah Board of Higher Education, and the Office of the Commissioner of Higher Education, oversaw the sham investigation and coverup and displayed indifference to Plaintiffs’ grievances. Still worse, Plaintiffs have lost all support in their roles as Title IX and equity compliance officials, advisors, and supervisors at Utah Tech, leaving one of Utah’s largest learning institutions devoid of Congress’ civil rights protections. Because of Defendants’ abhorrent conduct, Plaintiffs now seek every remedy available to them for these wrongs. 2 4854-3348-0433, v. 15 �Case 4:24-cv-00091-DN-PK Document 2 Filed 11/07/24 PageID.4 Page 3 of 42 PARTIES 2. Broadbent is a female individual, who resides in St. George, Utah. She has been employed by Utah Tech as General Counsel since January of 2020. In this role, she manages and leads the Office of General Counsel (“OGC”), with additional supervisory oversight over the Office of Equity and Compliance & Title IX (“OEC & TIX”) which Plaintiff Sainsbury leads and manages. Broadbent is Utah Tech’s most senior female administrator and one of only two females on the President’s Cabinet. 3. Rasband is an individual, who resides in St. George, Utah. He has been employed by Utah Tech since April 2020 and is presently its Senior Associate General Counsel. In his role, Rasband is the OGC attorney primarily responsible for advising the OEC and TIX. 4. Sainsbury is a female individual of African descent who resides in St. George, Utah. She has been employed by Utah Tech since August 2020 as its Director of Equity Compliance and Title IX Coordinator, leading and managing the OEC & TIX in her role. 5. Utah Tech is a public, degree-granting university of higher education within USHE, located in St. George, Utah. 6. Utah Tech is overseen by the Utah System of Higher Education (“USHE”), a Utah governmental agency. 7. USHE is governed by the Utah Board of Higher Education (“UBHE”) and the Office of the Commissioner of Higher Education (“OCHE”). 8. The president of Utah Tech is appointed by, and reports to, the UBHE, but is an employee of Utah Tech and is subject to Utah Tech policies and procedures. 3 4854-3348-0433, v. 15 �Case 4:24-cv-00091-DN-PK Document 2 Filed 11/07/24 PageID.5 Page 4 of 42 9. Geoff Landward is the Commissioner for USHE, UBHE, and OCHE, having previously served as their Deputy Commissioner and General Counsel. Landward is a resident of Utah. 10. Richard “Biff” Williams was the president of Utah Tech from 2014 to January 5, 2024. Until June 2024, Williams was a Utah resident. On information and belief, Williams is now a resident of Missouri. 11. Jordon Sharp is the Vice President of Marketing and Communications at Utah Tech, and on information and belief, has been employed by Utah Tech since 2012. Sharp is a resident of Utah. 12. Del Beatty is the Vice President of Student Affairs at Utah Tech, and on information and belief, has been employed by Utah Tech since 2008. Beatty is a resident of Utah. 13. Henrie Walton is Assistant to the President for Government and Community Relations/Interim Chief of Staff at Utah Tech and, on information and belief, has been employed by Utah Tech for the last nine years. Walton is a resident of Utah. 14. Michael Lacourse is Provost and Vice President of Academic Affairs and, on information and belief, has been employed by Utah Tech since at least 2016. Lacourse is a resident of Utah. 15. Courtney White is Interim President at Utah Tech, previously Chief of Staff, and, on information and belief, has been employed by Utah Tech since at least 2015. White is a resident of Utah. 4 4854-3348-0433, v. 15 �Case 4:24-cv-00091-DN-PK Document 2 Filed 11/07/24 PageID.6 Page 5 of 42 16. Alison Adams is the General Counsel for the UBHE, USHE, and OCHE, and she has been employed by USHE, and/or the UBHE and/or OCHE since approximately 2021. Adams is a resident of Utah. 17. Travis Rosenberg is Executive Director of Human Resources at Utah Tech and, on information and belief, has been employed by Utah Tech since at least 2016. Rosenberg is a resident of Utah. 18. Tiffany Wilson is the Chair of the Board of Trustees at Utah Tech. Wilson is a resident of Utah. 19. Jyl Hall is Director of Public Relations at Utah Tech and, on information and belief, has been employed by Utah Tech since at least 2014. Hall is a resident of Utah. 20. Jared Madsen is Director of University Design and Branding at Utah Tech and, on information and belief, has been employed by Utah Tech since at least 2014. Madsen is a resident of Utah. 21. Brooke Ulrich is Director of University Events and Promotions and, on information and belief, has been employed by Utah Tech since 2021. Ulrich is a resident of Utah. 22. Stacy Schmidt is Assistant Director of Public Relations at Utah Tech and, on information and belief, has been employed by Utah Tech since at least 2019. Schmidt is a resident of Utah. 23. Matt Black is Photographer and Videographer at Utah Tech and, on information and belief, has been employed by Utah Tech since at least 2019. Black is a resident of Utah. 24. Eric Pedersen is a Professor of Software Engineering at Utah Tech, previously a dean, and, on information and belief, has been employed by Utah Tech since at least 2014. Pedersen is a resident of Utah. 5 4854-3348-0433, v. 15 �Case 4:24-cv-00091-DN-PK Document 2 Filed 11/07/24 PageID.7 Page 6 of 42 25. JOHN AND JANE DOES 1-X are defendant individuals and/or entities whose true names are unknown, but who were involved in the conduct described herein and are liable for the claims for relief detailed herein. JURISDICTION AND VENUE 26. This Court has federal question jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1331, under Title IX, 20 U.S.C. § 1681 et seq.; 34 C.F.R. § 106.71; 42 U.S.C. § 2000e, et seq. 27. The Court has supplemental jurisdiction over Plaintiffs’ defamation, false light, breach of contract, intentional and negligent infliction of emotional distress, and tortious interference with contract claims pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1367, because the facts giving rise to these claims form part of the same case or controversy as Plaintiffs’ discrimination and retaliation claims under Title IX and Title VII. 28. The Court has personal jurisdiction over Defendants because Defendants reside in Utah, are incorporated in Utah, or their contacts with Utah gave rise to Plaintiffs’ claims. 29. Venue in this Court is proper under 28 U.S.C. § 1391(b) because a substantial part of the acts or omissions giving rise to the claims alleged herein occurred within this judicial district, and Defendants are subject to personal jurisdiction here. 30. Plaintiffs have taken steps to exhaust their administrative remedies before filing this suit. Specifically, Plaintiffs Broadbent and Sainsbury received their Right to Sue letters from the EEOC on November 6, 2024. 31. Plaintiffs have complied with the requirements of the Governmental Immunity Act, Utah Code § 63G-7-101 et seq. Plaintiffs submitted a Notice of Claim on August 30, 2024, to all relevant Defendants in this action and followed all necessary procedural steps required by statute. 6 4854-3348-0433, v. 15 �Case 4:24-cv-00091-DN-PK Document 2 Filed 11/07/24 PageID.8 Page 7 of 42 GENERAL ALLEGATIONS 32. For the last several years, Utah Tech has exhibited a culture of hostility in its highest administrative offices toward the protections of Title IX and Title VII. 33. Plaintiffs worked hard to establish a discrimination-free environment at Utah Tech. Yet, Plaintiffs received strong pushback, intimidation, discrimination, harassment, abuse, and retaliation in their ongoing attempts to educate Utah Tech leadership about, and to achieve compliance with, University policies regarding discrimination and harassment, including Title IX and Title VII. 34. For example, one such situation involved then-President Williams’ close friend and direct report, VP Sharp, and members of Sharp’s University Marketing and Communications team (“UMAC”) allowing, for over four years, the posting and display in a public break room on campus of highly obscene and vulgar sexual comments with their names attributed to the comments. Attached hereto under seal as Exhibits “A” and “B” are copies of the offensive information that was the subject of this situation. As a result of this situation and Plaintiffs’ legally-mandated response to it in September 2021, Sharp and his UMAC team’s gross misconduct was minimized by Human Resources and Williams; Plaintiffs were required to continue working directly with Sharp and his UMAC team; and Plaintiffs were viewed unfavorably by Sharp, other senior administrators, and the UMAC department, for simply fulfilling their job responsibilities. This situation is hereinafter referred to as the “September 2021 Incident.” 35. The September 2021 Incident, as well as other instances involving senior University administrators being involved in matters processed by the OEC & TIX, resulted in 7 4854-3348-0433, v. 15 �Case 4:24-cv-00091-DN-PK Document 2 Filed 11/07/24 PageID.9 Page 8 of 42 Utah Tech’s senior leaders questioning the OEC & TIX’s processes, Plaintiffs’ authority under those processes, and Plaintiffs’ professionalism and motives. Thus, a “poisoned well” and hostile work environment were created for Plaintiffs. Defendants Continue to Harass, Discriminate, and Retaliate Against Plaintiffs 36. Utah Tech sought to benefit from Sainsbury’s background and experience in the OEC & TIX, particularly regarding the visibility Sainsbury’s race. In April 2022, the University specifically reached out to Sainsbury to participate in a video for the rebranding of the institution from Dixie State University to Utah Tech University. This video, which included the unveiling of the new name and logo, prominently featured Sainsbury’s likeness and was distributed both nationally and internationally. Sainsbury was the central figure in this video, with her voice serving as the closing element. This strategic positioning was directly tied to Sainsbury’s race, as the University seemed to believe that her identity would lend greater credibility to the rebranding, especially in the eyes of diverse communities. 37. The University leveraged Sainsbury’s race to enhance its image in key publicfacing situations. This included her role in meeting athletes and their families, representing the University at freshman orientations, and positioning her as a resource for students facing issues of discrimination. However, this use of Sainsbury’s background was more tokenistic than sincere. The University seemed more concerned with the symbolic value of Sainsbury’s presence rather than empowering her to fulfill her legally mandated responsibilities as outlined by Title IX. 38. Sainsbury’s experiences with certain University leadership figures, particularly Lacourse, reflect a pattern of marginalization. At Williams’ request, Plaintiff Broadbent asked Plaintiffs Rasband and Sainsbury o provide Lacourse with a “heads up” concerning a course of 8 4854-3348-0433, v. 15 �Case 4:24-cv-00091-DN-PK Document 2 Filed 11/07/24 PageID.10 Page 9 of 42 action determined for a Title VII matter being processed by the OEC and TIX. During that meeting, Lacourse openly disrespected Sainsbury, questioning her right to offer input on Title IX matters. During this meeting, Lacourse pointed a finger at Sainsbury and aggressively slammed his fist on the table, demanding to know “who do you think you are!” His behavior was deeply unsettling and discriminatory in nature, as he targeted Sainsbury with verbal threats. The intensity and nature of Lacourse's actions, which included physical intimidation and refusal to listen to Rasband’s attempts to mediate, left Sainsbury feeling emotionally and physically unsafe. 39. Plaintiff Rasband was also present for this meeting with Lacourse and was also subjected to his verbal abuse and harassment. Because both Plaintiffs Sainsbury and Rasband are Plaintiff Broadbent’s direct reports, Plaintiff Sainsbury complained to Plaintiff Broadbent (who was out of town at the time at a conference) that Plaintiff Sainsbury felt she had no power to stand up to Lacourse as the University's Provost, or to champion the University’s policies as prescribed by federal regulations and her job responsibilities as Director of the OEC & TIX. 40. When Plaintiff Broadbent learned of the further undermining, abuse, harassment, and attacking of her direct report, Plaintiff Sainsbury, and to a lesser degree, her direct report Rasband, and the OEC & TIX which Plaintiff Sainsbury manages and directs, and for which Plaintiff Broadbent was responsible for overseeing in order to maintain the University’s federal financial aid funding, Plaintiff Broadbent experienced additional physical and emotional distress and further exacerbation of the existing hostile work environment. 41. Even without the pre-existing incidents which had created a hostile work environment for Plaintiffs, Lacourse's behavior alone in the June 23, 2022, meeting created a hostile work environment for Plaintiffs, and none of them have felt safe or comfortable in Lacourse's presence or in communications with him since that time. Lacourse’s misconduct was 9 4854-3348-0433, v. 15 �Case 4:24-cv-00091-DN-PK Document 2 Filed 11/07/24 PageID.11 Page 10 of 42 so harassing, discriminatory, and abusive that Plaintiffs Rasband and Sainsbury were rendered unable to perform their work responsibilities for time thereafter and the course of action for the Title VII matter was delayed due to Plaintiff Sainsbury’s inability to proceed in the wake of such harassment and discrimination. 42. After this meeting, Lacourse followed up with an email to Defendant Williams, in which Lacourse likened Plaintiff Sainsbury unfavorably to a former attorney of color who had previously been considered “problematic” by certain University officials. This email contained racially charged language and revealed a clear bias against Plaintiff Sainsbury—calling her “reckless,” “irresponsible,” “unpredictable,” and “malicious.” These statements reflect racial animus, as if Lacourse and the University felt that a Black, educated female in a position of authority could not be trusted or was inherently suspicious. 43. Lacourse's actions and inactions, both before and after the June 23, 2022 meeting with Plaintiffs Rasband and Sainsbury, in which Lacourse undermined Plaintiffs' abilities to ensure the University and its employees and students are compliant with the nondiscrimination and harassment laws and policies which apply to the University and its employees and students, contributed to the "poisoned well" and indirectly contributed to Plaintiffs being retaliated against and/or being the recipients of unwelcome conduct by Williams when he targeted them by falsely signing their names to the sexual display of vegetables in the shape of male genitalia which he delivered to Sharp on November 8, 2023. 44. The University also failed to take appropriate action when Sainsbury was subjected to mockery and ridicule by certain Deans, including an inappropriate “Title IX mocking party” that celebrated a former respondent and disparaged Sainsbury’s work. The event included “gag gifts,” with a “Title IX for Dummies" book, and was intended to belittle the 10 4854-3348-0433, v. 15 �Case 4:24-cv-00091-DN-PK Document 2 Filed 11/07/24 PageID.12 Page 11 of 42 serious work of the OEC & TIX. This behavior was never addressed by the University, and no disciplinary action was taken against those who participated in this hostile and discriminatory activity. 45. Additionally, the University failed to protect Sainsbury when former Title IX respondent and dean, Kyle Wells, who was dissatisfied with the outcome of his case, began petitioning the Utah Attorney General’s office for recourse against Sainsbury. Although Wells never formally appealed the actions or findings in his case, the University allowed him to attempt to undermine Sainsbury’s professional standing by seeking adverse action against her. The University also failed to provide her with adequate support or protection, including addressing Wells' actions, which seemed retaliatory in nature. They did not prevent Wells from defaming Sainsbury both internally within the University and externally, and she was not informed of or supported through these ongoing attempts to undermine her credibility and role as a Title IX Coordinator. 46. Defendants also resisted Plaintiffs’ efforts to train Utah Tech’s leaders on Title VII and Title IX compliance. For example, after a training session in November 2022 to try and correct the “poisoned well,” Lacourse stated at a Cabinet meeting that the OEC & TIX’s policies were being “weaponized.” Utah Tech’s highest leaders continuously and openly undermined the OEC & TIX’s and OGC’s efforts to administer and ensure the protections of Title IX and Equity Compliance for students and employees at Utah Tech. 47. Another example of Plaintiffs’ ongoing hostile work environment occurred in August 2023, when Lacourse and Pedersen harassed and verbally abused Plaintiff Rasband in a meeting which Plaintiff Broadbent requested that Rasband arrange with them, to ensure that a 11 4854-3348-0433, v. 15 �Case 4:24-cv-00091-DN-PK Document 2 Filed 11/07/24 PageID.13 Page 12 of 42 Title IX complainant in a recently-resolved matter would not be subjected to any retaliation by University officials. Defendants Target Plaintiffs with Sexual Obscenity 48. Utah Tech’s pattern of hostile and brazen misconduct, discrimination, harassment, and retaliation by the senior male administrators culminated in a crude, sexual, vulgar, obscene, and damaging display left on the porch of a Utah Tech administrator by the then-sitting University President Williams, and falsely attributed by him to the Plaintiffs. 49. On November 8, 2023, then-President Williams—Plaintiff Broadbent’s direct supervisor—left a display of an assortment of vegetables shaped as male genitalia, including a long zucchini referred to as a “zuweenie,” on VP Sharp’s front porch to “help” with his recovery from his vasectomy that day. Williams falsely, and without their knowledge or consent, attributed the innately sexual display to Plaintiffs, by listing Plaintiffs’ names on an accompanying note containing sexual innuendo (although two of their names were misspelled). Photographs of the obscene display and note falsely attributed to Plaintiffs follow: 12 4854-3348-0433, v. 15 �Case 4:24-cv-00091-DN-PK Document 2 Filed 11/07/24 PageID.14 Page 13 of 42 50. Earlier that day, Williams told his Chief of Staff, Courtney White, that he intended to drop off a gift for Sharp after Sharp’s surgery, and Williams implied to White that the gift was going to be something funny that they could laugh about afterward. 51. Defendant Williams’ misconduct was directed toward Plaintiffs in response to their execution of their duties within the OGC and OEC & TIX, including, but not limited to, the September 2021 Incident involving the sexual comments posted in the UMAC breakroom. 52. After receiving the innately sexual display and “zuweenie” note falsely listing Plaintiffs as the perpetrators, Sharp did not contact any of the Plaintiffs to notify them that their names were attributed to the obscene delivery he received. 53. Instead, shortly after the delivery, Sharp phoned his and Plaintiff Broadbent’s supervisor/the University’s president, Williams, and inquired whether he was the perpetrator of the vulgar display and note with sexual innuendo falsely attributed to Plaintiffs. Sharp texted Williams photos of the vulgar display, the note with Plaintiffs’ names on it, and the RING doorbell footage showing a man (Williams) with a hoodie—cinched to disguise his face— making the delivery. Williams denied having any knowledge of, or involvement in, the delivery to Sharp. Williams did not take any action to discourage Sharp from further disseminating the photos and information associating Plaintiffs with the obscene delivery. 54. Sharp then called his close friend, VPSA Del Beatty, who also serves on the President’s Cabinet with Plaintiff Broadbent, inquiring whether he made the delivery, and Sharp texted Beatty photos of the vulgar display, the note with sexual innuendo falsely attributing the delivery to Plaintiffs, and the RING doorbell footage link. Beatty denied any knowledge of, or involvement in, the delivery to Sharp. Beatty also did not notify Plaintiffs that their names were 13 4854-3348-0433, v. 15 �Case 4:24-cv-00091-DN-PK Document 2 Filed 11/07/24 PageID.15 Page 14 of 42 attributed to the obscene delivery, nor did Beatty take any action to discourage Sharp from further disseminating the photos and information associating Plaintiffs with the obscene delivery. Defendants Repeatedly Disseminate the Sexual Obscenity 55. VP Sharp then sent a group chat to his eleven full-time UMAC team members with photos of the vulgar display, the note ascribing the “zuweenie” display to Plaintiffs, and the RING doorbell footage link showing the man (Williams) delivering the display and note. 56. VP Sharp asked the UMAC Group who had made the delivery, to which Jared Madsen responded: “All Becky!!” (referencing Plaintiff Broadbent, the University’s General Counsel). Another employee, Matt Black, responded “Please report Hazel to...Hazel” (referencing Plaintiff Sainsbury, the University’s Title IX Coordinator). Brooke Ulrich commented, “I’m dying!!!!,” and Stacy Schmidt contributed, “Most impressive zuweenie I’ve ever seen!” VP Sharp texted the group that Plaintiffs “really did their homework...(winking face emoji),” implying that Plaintiffs had assessed Sharp’s private parts when purportedly selecting the size of the vegetables for the vulgar display which they purportedly delivered to him. 57. Despite receiving Title IX training specific to their department—including their reporting obligations— as well as the University’s annual Title IX compliance trainings, none of the UMAC employees or VP Sharp reported the delivery of the innately sexual display, the note containing the “zuweenie” sexual innuendo falsely attributed to Plaintiffs, or the retaliatory and harassing contributions on the UMAC Group Chat from Madsen, Schmidt, Sharp, Black, and Ulrich. Moreover, Jyl Hall falsely described the content of this group chat during Utah Tech’s Title IX investigation, and Hall told the investigator she would not provide the additional screenshots (which would have revealed to the investigator Sharp’s and his UMAC team’s comments). Madsen and Schmidt were also deceitful to the investigator. 14 4854-3348-0433, v. 15 �Case 4:24-cv-00091-DN-PK Document 2 Filed 11/07/24 PageID.16 Page 15 of 42 58. The following morning, November 9, 2023, Williams brought his misconduct to campus when he showed Chief of Staff White a photo of the vulgar display which Williams delivered to Sharp the night before. Williams informed White that he left a note with Plaintiff Broadbent’s and Plaintiff Sainsbury’s names on it. White recognized the gravity of including Plaintiffs’ names on the note given they were both female administrators with responsibilities for ensuring the University’s Title IX compliance. Even so, White did not report the incident to the OGC, OEC & TIX, Human Resources, or the University’s Whistleblower hotline, or to Plaintiff Broadbent when he sat next to her at a dinner that evening held in the presidential home for Cabinet members and Board of Trustees members. 59. The next day, during the University’s November 10, 2023, Board of Trustees business meeting, VP Sharp shared the photos of the vulgar display and note attributing it to Plaintiffs with another of Plaintiff Broadbent’s Cabinet colleagues, Henrie Walton, Assistant to the President for Government and Community Relations. Walton denied his involvement in the delivery, and he recognized the clear connection of Plaintiffs’ names being falsely listed on the obscene delivery as being due to Plaintiffs’ response to the September 2021 Incident. Walton did not, however, request that Sharp cease disseminating the photos so damaging to Plaintiffs. Walton also did not inform Plaintiff Broadbent (who was present at the meeting) about what Sharp had shown him, nor did he report it to anyone else. 60. Following the Board of Trustees’ business meeting, VP Sharp then shared the photos of the vulgar display and sexual innuendo note falsely ascribing it to Plaintiffs yet again at the Board of Trustees luncheon, with many of the University’s staff and administration present in addition to the Trustees. 15 4854-3348-0433, v. 15 �Case 4:24-cv-00091-DN-PK Document 2 Filed 11/07/24 PageID.17 Page 16 of 42 61. At the Board of Trustees luncheon, VP Sharp and VP Beatty beckoned Plaintiff Rasband over to their table purporting to need his legal assistance. Instead, they proceeded to first inquire about his interest in gardening, and then about OGC’s involvement in the vulgar display and “zuweenie” note in the presence of at least four other upper-level University employees, including Assistant to the President Walton (who was already aware of the inappropriate content from Sharp’s prior dissemination of the photos to him during the business meeting). Sharp informed Plaintiff Rasband that he had already inquired of Williams, Beatty, and Sharp’s entire UMAC team, about the delivery. 62. Plaintiff Rasband was shocked, embarrassed, and humiliated by this unexpected encounter in the presence of a group of administrators senior to him on campus and at the hands of two of Utah Tech’s vice presidents. Despite the power differential, Plaintiff Rasband tried to make clear to this large group of Utah Tech Cabinet members and directors that he and the other members of the OGC and the Title IX Office had nothing to do with this offensive act and it was not something they would ever do. Utah Tech Fails to Provide an Adequate Process for Plaintiffs’ Grievances 63. Based on Plaintiffs’ knowledge at the time (which was limited to what they learned on November 10, 2023 from Rasband’s shocking experience at the Board of Trustees’ luncheon, and without any knowledge or expectation of Williams’ involvement), Plaintiff Broadbent, on behalf of her direct reports, Plaintiffs Sainsbury and Rasband, and herself, reported the above incidents to Utah Tech’s Executive Director of Human Resources, Travis Rosenberg, on November 12, 2023. Plaintiff Broadbent also informed Rosenberg of her intent to speak with Williams the following day, if possible, about the incidents. 16 4854-3348-0433, v. 15 �Case 4:24-cv-00091-DN-PK Document 2 Filed 11/07/24 PageID.18 Page 17 of 42 64. The following day, November 13, 2023, Plaintiff Broadbent reported the same incidents directly to then-President Williams in a one-on-one meeting, completely unaware that Williams perpetrated the vulgar display and “zuweenie” note, which he falsely ascribed to Plaintiffs. In their meeting, Williams was dismissive of Plaintiffs’ reported concerns about the incidents (despite Williams stating that his (and Sharp’s) running group all knew about the November 8, 2023, delivery), and Williams attempted to manipulate and silence Plaintiff Broadbent about the incidents by assuring her that Plaintiffs were “loved” and “part of the family.” 65. When Plaintiff Broadbent reported to Williams her belief that the vulgar acts and defamatory dissemination were in retaliation for prior incidents and complaints Plaintiffs made to Williams and Rosenberg about other matters (including Title IX and Equity Compliance issues) involving senior administrators, which had already created a hostile work environment for Plaintiffs, Williams dismissed Plaintiffs’ report of retaliation, again without revealing to Plaintiff Broadbent that he, the University President and Plaintiff Broadbent’s supervisor, was the actual perpetrator of the November 8, 2023 vulgar and defamatory delivery to VP Sharp. 66. As their November 13, 2023, meeting concluded, Williams asked Plaintiff Broadbent to find out whether Plaintiffs Rasband and Sainsbury were interested in talking to Williams so he could also assure them that their concerns were not real and they were “loved” and “part of the family.” 67. Following the November 13, 2023, meeting with Plaintiff Broadbent, Williams immediately informed White in his adjacent office that Plaintiff Broadbent was upset about Sharp’s and Beatty’s dissemination of the delivery of the sexually offensive and vulgar display and note with Plaintiffs’ falsely ascribed names, and Williams expressed to White his concern that 17 4854-3348-0433, v. 15 �Case 4:24-cv-00091-DN-PK Document 2 Filed 11/07/24 PageID.19 Page 18 of 42 he would end up on the front page of the Chronicle of Higher Ed. Williams expressed no concern for the harm to Plaintiffs as a result of their names being associated with the delivery to a University Vice President of an obscene display and a sexual innuendo note. 68. At several key points, Utah Tech, USHE, UBHE, OCHE and their employees and agents failed to provide Plaintiffs a timely and adequate remedial process pursuant to University policy for their Title IX and Title VII complaints of discrimination, sexual harassment, hostile work environment, and retaliation. Utah Tech and USHE, UBHE, and OCHE ignored or intentionally avoided the applicable policies, processes, and timelines which should have been afforded to Plaintiffs as employees of a Utah public institution of higher education. 69. On November 15, 2023, Rosenberg informed Plaintiff Broadbent by phone that a witness (White) had informed Rosenberg that Williams perpetrated the innately sexual display and defamatory “zuweenie” note ascribing its delivery to Plaintiffs. Rosenberg asked to meet with Plaintiffs Broadbent and Rasband that afternoon, and in their meeting, Rosenberg informed them that Rosenberg in Human Resources was now investigating the matter. 70. The afternoon of November 15, 2023, in his effort to silence Plaintiffs, Williams left Plaintiff Broadbent two separate messages inquiring whether she had talked with Plaintiffs Rasband and Sainsbury to see if they were interested in talking to Williams about what she reported to him on November 13, 2023. 71. Rosenberg acknowledged to Plaintiffs Broadbent and Rasband in their November 15, 2023 meeting, that the University’s Title IX policy (Policy 154) was implicated. Rosenberg was also aware that Plaintiff Sainsbury could not serve as Title IX Coordinator for a case in which she was a victim and potential complainant. However, no substitute Title IX Coordinator was provided by Utah Tech to Plaintiffs to conduct an intake meeting, to discuss needed 18 4854-3348-0433, v. 15 �Case 4:24-cv-00091-DN-PK Document 2 Filed 11/07/24 PageID.20 Page 19 of 42 supportive measures, and to inquire about the parties’ interest in Informal Resolution, as required by Title IX and University Policy 154. Additionally, Rosenberg decided to lie to Williams about his knowledge (from White) of Williams’ involvement in the incidents, and Rosenberg falsely informed Williams that Plaintiff Broadbent initiated Rosenberg’s investigation, rather than disclosing that Rosenberg was investigating based on White’s report to him. 72. Indeed, although Rosenberg, the University and the UBHE, USHE, and OCHE could have quickly retained an external Title IX Coordinator to conduct an intake meeting and discuss needed supportive measures with Plaintiffs, and to inquire whether the parties were mutually interested in engaging in the Informal Resolution process provided by the University’s Title IX policy, they chose not to do so. Thus, they denied Plaintiffs rights afforded to them under federal law and University policy. 73. In the days that followed Rosenberg’s November 15, 2023 meeting with Plaintiffs Broadbent and Rasband, Rosenberg made clear to Plaintiffs that Utah Tech’s and the UBHE, USHE, and OCHE’s top priority was to refrain from contacting Plaintiffs. Broadbent and Sainsbury were not even interviewed by Rosenberg during his initial, overly narrow “investigation.” Broadbent had to hurry and type up an account of her November 13, 2023, meeting with Williams and the underlying events of November 10-12, 2023, to forward to Rosenberg with the hope he would include it in his “investigation” report. Rosenberg made it clear that if Plaintiffs deemed the incidents to be “unwelcome” conduct and wanted the institution or UBHE, USHE, and OCHE to do something about the misconduct, then Plaintiffs had to formalize complaints under Policy 151, the University’s staff grievance policy (which had an upcoming, short deadline). 19 4854-3348-0433, v. 15 �Case 4:24-cv-00091-DN-PK Document 2 Filed 11/07/24 PageID.21 Page 20 of 42 74. Rosenberg imposed this requirement on Plaintiffs despite the fact that Commissioner Landward and Utah Tech’s Board of Trustees Chair Tiffany Wilson both learned from Williams on or about November 17, 2023, that he created and delivered to VP Sharp the November 8, 2023 vulgar display and “zuweenie” note ascribing it to Plaintiffs, and that an investigation was being conducted by Rosenberg. Plaintiffs should not have been forced to formalize complaints under Policy 151. Rather, since the University and USHE, UBHE, and OCHE were on notice of reported incidents of sexual harassment, the University should have followed the Title IX process by having a Title IX coordinator reach out to Plaintiffs for intake and supportive measures and a discussion of their potential interest in Informal Resolution, and the opportunity to formalize complaints under Title IX only if Plaintiffs opted to do so. Plaintiffs were given only the option to formalize their complaints under Policy 151 by November 28, 2023. 75. As of November 17, 2023, both Utah Tech’s Trustees’ Chair, Wilson, and the UBHE, USHE, and OCHE’s Commissioner, Landward, in addition to Utah Tech’s Rosenberg, should have ensured a trained Title IX Coordinator was reaching out to Plaintiffs for an intake meeting, to discuss supportive measures, and to offer the opportunity for Informal Resolution. 76. Instead, Plaintiffs were forced to quickly formalize complaints against Williams, Sharp, Beatty, Walton, and other administrators involved in the already-existing hostile work environment, Lacourse and Pedersen, in order to seek to remedy the hostile work environment, harassment, discrimination, retaliation, abusive conduct, and defamation which they experienced—all without being provided an opportunity for an informal process or remedy, and despite their rights under Title IX and University Policy 154 regarding Informal Resolution. 20 4854-3348-0433, v. 15 �Case 4:24-cv-00091-DN-PK Document 2 Filed 11/07/24 PageID.22 Page 21 of 42 77. Because of the concerted effort by Utah Tech and the UBHE, USHE, and OCHE to protect then-President Williams’ and his senior administrators’ reputations (after they had damaged Plaintiffs’), the information from Rosenberg’s Human Resources investigation into the November 8th and 10th incidents was withheld from Plaintiffs until late spring 2024, when Rosenberg’s November 2023 “investigation” summary was finally produced to Plaintiffs as part of an internal administrative process. 78. On December 5, 2023, the UBHE, USHE, and OCHE’s legal counsel, Adams, contacted each Plaintiff and informed them Defendants were still trying to determine how to process Plaintiffs’ formal grievances against the individual Defendants. She informed them that the UBHE was hiring DHRM investigators to investigate Plaintiffs’ formal grievances; that investigation notices would be issued later that week; and that more details would be provided to Plaintiffs. 79. At the same time the entity Defendants were representing to Plaintiffs that they were being afforded an internal grievance process, and despite having express knowledge of Williams’ misconduct, the UBHE, USHE, OCHE, and Utah Tech negotiated and provided Williams with an extraordinarily favorable separation agreement (a true and correct copy of which is attached hereto as Exhibit “C”), a lauded send-off by Utah Tech Board of Trustees’ Chair Wilson on social media, and use of Utah Tech’s media platforms for Williams to disseminate his desired narrative about his departure. All of this was done despite Plaintiffs’ rights under Title IX to decide whether they wished to pursue Informal Resolution; without Plaintiffs’ knowledge or input; and while misrepresenting to Plaintiffs that the Defendants were finally commencing the required Title IX process. 21 4854-3348-0433, v. 15 �Case 4:24-cv-00091-DN-PK Document 2 Filed 11/07/24 PageID.23 Page 22 of 42 80. In turn, Plaintiffs were abruptly notified by Adams on December 18 and 19, 2023, that their complaints against Williams were being dismissed by the UBHE with Williams’ departure, because the UBHE would no longer have “jurisdiction” over Williams after he stepped down as President. Adams was the only point of contact provided by the Defendant entities to Plaintiffs for weeks, despite Adams being legal counsel for the UBHE, USHE, and OCHE. After Plaintiffs insisted that their Title IX complaints against Williams could not legally be dismissed, Adams claimed she “misspoke” about those claims being dismissed and the UBHE reluctantly provided a sham Title IX process while still dismissing Plaintiffs’ complaints against Williams under other applicable University policies. True and correct copies of the UBHE’s January 4, 2024, notification letters which Plaintiffs received from the UBHE are attached as Exhibit “D.” 81. To Plaintiffs’ detriment, while the UBHE, USHE, and OCHE and Utah Tech secretly negotiated the favorable separation agreement for Williams, they also failed to take any action whatsoever concerning Plaintiffs’ Formal Grievances against Sharp, Beatty, Walton, Lacourse, and Pedersen, thereby subjecting Plaintiffs to an ongoing hostile work environment and further defamation and retaliation. 82. The message Plaintiffs received from the entity Defendants was clear: if you raise complaints against your President and other senior administrators at your public institution of higher education, you will not receive due process and you will face adverse consequences. Meanwhile those who perpetrate misconduct will be outwardly rewarded and receive protective treatment from the institution and its governing and advisory bodies. 22 4854-3348-0433, v. 15 �Case 4:24-cv-00091-DN-PK Document 2 Filed 11/07/24 PageID.24 Page 23 of 42 Utah Tech Further Retaliates Against Plaintiff Broadbent 83. In retaliation for being a complainant and witness in Plaintiffs’ internal complaints against Williams, Sharp, Lacourse, and other senior University administrators, and for requesting supportive measures to attempt to restore her equal access to the workplace while Plaintiffs’ internal complaints were pending, on February 26, 2024, Utah Tech’s Interim President White, with assistance from Executive Director of Human Resources Rosenberg, placed Plaintiff Broadbent involuntarily on administrative leave until the University’s investigation processes concluded (i.e., an indeterminate period entirely controlled by the University), and required her to remain available during business hours for the University to contact her. In sharp contrast, none of the Defendant Respondents were placed on leave. 84. During the involuntary leave imposed on her, White also prohibited Plaintiff Broadbent from coming to Utah Tech’s premises without a demonstrated need, and required her to first, in writing, request approval from Rosenberg to do so. 85. The manner in which Plaintiff Broadbent was banished from Utah Tech’s premises was also humiliating and disruptive. Broadbent was ambushed by White and Rosenberg in a meeting calendared as a normal weekly one-on-one meeting between White and Broadbent. Despite Broadbent being a known complainant in internal grievance matters arising from her November 28, 2023, Formal Grievance against Williams, Sharp, Lacourse, Beatty, Walton, and Pedersen, Plaintiff Broadbent was not notified of the nature of the February 26, 2024, meeting in advance, and she was not provided with an opportunity to have an advisor or support person attend the meeting with her, in violation of University policy. 86. After the meeting, in which she was notified of White’s decision to immediately place her on leave (purportedly in her “best interest”), Plaintiff Broadbent was subjected to a 23 4854-3348-0433, v. 15 �Case 4:24-cv-00091-DN-PK Document 2 Filed 11/07/24 PageID.25 Page 24 of 42 public “walk of shame” back to her office across campus with two Human Resources employees escorting her (Rosenberg and his team member, Dani Apo), as if she had committed a severe infraction or policy violation, instead of being the known recipient of multiple Utah Tech administrators’ misconduct (about which she properly reported and in good faith grieved). 87. Because her OGC team was still in their offices when she returned under Human Resources’ supervision, Plaintiff Broadbent explained to her team, despite her humiliation, that as a purported supportive measure, Utah Tech was placing her on leave effective immediately for an unknown period of time and also banishing her from campus. In addition to having to quickly cancel her plans to attend a University gala event that evening, Broadbent had to immediately determine in Apo’s and Rosenberg’s presence which paper and digital files she might need to try and continue with her internal complaint processes and to meet imposed deadlines in those processes that week. 88. Plaintiff Broadbent also had to immediately turn in her University-issued laptop, ID/building access card, office keys, and purchasing card to Rosenberg, as if she were a respondent who posed some risk to University operations or personnel, rather than an innocent complainant. In sharp contrast, under the terms of Williams’ separation agreement, attached as Exhibit “C,” Williams was allowed to keep his University-issued laptop, and to continue living in the presidential home rent-free for six months. 89. In fact, prior to White summarily placing Plaintiff Broadbent on leave and banishing her from campus, Utah Tech had never placed a complainant involuntarily on administrative leave. Because Plaintiff Broadbent reported and internally grieved misconduct by senior University administrators, she was subjected to an action the University never before imposed on a complainant. 24 4854-3348-0433, v. 15 �Case 4:24-cv-00091-DN-PK Document 2 Filed 11/07/24 PageID.26 Page 25 of 42 90. After White summarily placed Plaintiff Broadbent involuntarily on leave, Utah Tech replaced her with an Assistant Attorney General as “team lead,” denied Plaintiff Broadbent the rights, privileges, and many benefits of her position, and severely impeded her ability to participate as a complainant and witness in Plaintiffs’ grievance processes. 91. Not only were these retaliatory acts extremely traumatic for Plaintiff Broadbent, causing her to consider dismissing her internal grievances against Williams and the remaining senior administrator respondents and seek reinstatement (which was likely the intent behind these retaliatory acts), but they were also demoralizing and traumatic for Plaintiff Rasband to witness, and for Plaintiff Sainsbury to learn about. As co-complainants in the internal complaints against Williams, Sharp, Lacourse, and Beatty, Plaintiffs Rasband and Sainsbury have feared that they will also be removed from their roles and banished from campus as well. 92. On information and belief, between January 5, 2024, and February 26, 2024, knowing Plaintiff Broadbent was a complainant and witness in grievances against Williams, Sharp, Beatty, Lacourse, Pedersen, and Walton, Defendant Wilson made disparaging and false statements about Plaintiff Broadbent and the OGC to Defendant White (and potentially others) and she sought to have Plaintiff Broadbent’s employment terminated. 93. On information and belief, on or about March 20, 2024, knowing Plaintiff Broadbent was a complainant and witness in grievances against Williams, Sharp, Beatty, Lacourse, Pedersen, and Walton, Defendant Wilson made disparaging and false statements about Plaintiff Broadbent and the OGC to members of the UBHE Audit Committee, and potentially others. Specifically, Wilson falsely asserted that the OGC’s activity had been vindictive, and that the OGC had isolated itself and was not assisting Utah Tech. 25 4854-3348-0433, v. 15 �Case 4:24-cv-00091-DN-PK Document 2 Filed 11/07/24 PageID.27 Page 26 of 42 94. On information and belief, knowing Plaintiff Broadbent was a complainant and witness in grievances against Williams, Sharp, Beatty, Lacourse, Pedersen, and Walton; knowing White had involuntarily placed Plaintiff Broadbent on leave; and knowing Plaintiff Broadbent’s complaints against the University’s senior administrators have been substantiated through the University’s investigations, Defendant Wilson has continued to make disparaging and false statements about Plaintiff Broadbent and the OGC to Defendant White (and potentially others) and Wilson has sought to have Plaintiff Broadbent’s employment terminated. 95. On information and belief, Plaintiffs Sainsbury and Broadbent learned in April 2024 that Utah Tech, and/or one or more of the individual Defendants, circulated a false rumor on and off campus that Plaintiff Broadbent and/or OGC harassed Plaintiff Sainsbury. This false rumor was circulated to hide and explain away the reasons for Plaintiff Broadbent’s involuntary administrative leave. However, Plaintiff Broadbent and OGC never harassed Plaintiff Sainsbury, and Plaintiff Sainsbury never filed a complaint for harassment against Plaintiff Broadbent or OGC. 96. After ten weeks of being on involuntary leave, and with little to no communication from Utah Tech, Plaintiff Broadbent inquired through the Interim Title IX Coordinator retained by Utah Tech and USHE, UBHE, and OCHE when the University planned to allow her to return to her role. She was informed that the leave was intended to “continue through the conclusion of the investigations,” although the subject investigations under Human Resources’ oversight were completed by that time. This was further retaliation against Plaintiff Broadbent for engaging in the additional protected activity of filing charges of discrimination with federal agencies by the legally-mandated 180-day deadline. 26 4854-3348-0433, v. 15 �Case 4:24-cv-00091-DN-PK Document 2 Filed 11/07/24 PageID.28 Page 27 of 42 97. It has now been over six months since the internal investigations of four respondents (Lacourse, Pedersen, Beatty, and Walton) under Rosenberg’s Human Resources oversight were completed, and over four months since the Sharp investigation under the GRS Interim Title IX Coordinator’s oversight was completed. Yet, Plaintiff Broadbent has received no communication as to when—if ever—she will be allowed to return to her role and to campus. Her September 2024 request (through another Interim Title IX Coordinator) to be reinstated has been met with silence from her employer, Utah Tech. She has, however, been informed through an investigation process, that a Trustee (presumably Wilson) still seeks to have her employment terminated. 98. During the time Plaintiff Broadbent has been involuntarily out on leave, she has been prevented from supervising her team and from receiving her annual self-evaluation. She has also been excluded from all professional development opportunities (including a pre-approved NACUA General Counsel Institute, a USHE General Counsel Retreat in Moab, an out of state threat assessment conference she previously attended annually, and multiple other continuing legal education opportunities), all Utah Tech Staff activities and numerous other University events attended by Cabinet members in the months since she was placed on leave—including the Fire and Ice Gala, the Great Race, multiple end of year awards banquets, two Commencement ceremonies, Staff Development Day, the August Cabinet Retreat at Entrada, recent Fall 2024 back to school events, such as the Welcome Back BBQ, Convocation, Freshman Welcome Wednesday, and dorm move-in days—and all Cabinet meetings, University Council meetings, and Board of Trustees meetings and functions which she would normally attend as General Counsel. 27 4854-3348-0433, v. 15 �Case 4:24-cv-00091-DN-PK Document 2 Filed 11/07/24 PageID.29 Page 28 of 42 99. All the while, Utah Tech’s remaining senior administrators who actively participated in creating a hostile work environment for Plaintiffs and/or retaliated against Plaintiffs—Sharp, Beatty, Lacourse, Walton, Pedersen, and White—have been allowed to participate freely in professional events and trainings afforded by their leadership roles, while also being held out to the USHE, Utah Tech, and St. George communities as leaders of integrity who uphold the University’s stated values (including “a safe, tolerant and welcoming community” with an “open culture grounded on principles of honesty, integrity, sharing, transparency, accountability, mutual respect…”) and policies (including Equity Compliance, Title IX, and Abusive Conduct). Utah Tech Further Retaliates Against Plaintiffs Rasband and Sainsbury 100. In retaliation for engaging in protected activity by internally complaining against Utah Tech’s leaders who targeted them, harassed them, defamed them, and engaged in abusive conduct toward them, and in retaliation for engaging in subsequent additional protected activity by filing charges of discrimination with federal agencies by the required deadlines, Plaintiff Rasband has been subjected to an openly hostile work environment and has been frozen out of many of his duties in the Office of General Counsel. He has been left out of leadership meetings and decision-making processes that he normally would have been involved in prior to making these complaints. For example, Rasband was excluded from serving on the hiring committee for a new police chief; and he was not named the “team lead” when the University placed Plaintiff Broadbent involuntarily on leave, despite routinely serving as her back-up if she was absent. As a result of Plaintiff Broadbent’s shocking banishment, Plaintiff Rasband has feared that he too will face the same involuntary removal from campus as his supervisor Plaintiff Broadbent did, if he complains about his current hostile working conditions. 28 4854-3348-0433, v. 15 �Case 4:24-cv-00091-DN-PK Document 2 Filed 11/07/24 PageID.30 Page 29 of 42 101. In retaliation for internally complaining against Utah Tech’s leaders and for engaging in additional protected activity by filing charges of discrimination with federal agencies by the required deadlines, Plaintiff Sainsbury has been deprived of the support that her office requires, and she has been subjected to an ongoing openly hostile work environment. Plaintiff Sainsbury’s supervision was reassigned to Interim President White, where she was left without communication, supervision, or support for her office for several months after Plaintiff Broadbent was placed on involuntary leave. As a result of Plaintiff Broadbent’s banishment, Plaintiff Sainsbury has feared that she too will face the same involuntary removal from campus as her former supervisor, Plaintiff Broadbent, did if Plaintiff Sainsbury complains about her current hostile working conditions. 102. Additionally, Plaintiff Sainsbury was denied equal participation in the Trailblazer Leadership Development overseen by Director Rosenberg and taught by VP Sharp and VP Beatty, who were instructed not to communicate with her during the pendency of her grievance processes. Sainsbury was also not afforded an equal opportunity to be selected by Chair Wilson to present her project to the Utah Tech Board of Trustees because the Trustees were aware of her grievance against senior administrators. Utah Tech’s and the UBHE, USHE, and OCHE’s Outsourcing of the Title IX Process Failed 103. Utah Tech and UBHE’s, USHE’s, and OCHE’s attempt to delegate some of their mandated legal responsibilities to an external vendor has failed to Plaintiffs’ detriment. These Defendants hired Grand River Solutions (GRS) to handle some of the processes discussed above, yet Defendants failed to maintain proper oversight of the vendor, such that those processes have been sham processes, both biased and unrecognizable to Plaintiffs as practitioners. Time and 29 4854-3348-0433, v. 15 �Case 4:24-cv-00091-DN-PK Document 2 Filed 11/07/24 PageID.31 Page 30 of 42 again, GRS demonstrated a bias in favor of the Defendants that harmed Plaintiffs’ rights under Title IX and University policy. 104. Nothing about Utah Tech’s and USHE’s, UBHE’s, and OCHE’s responses to Plaintiffs’ reported concerns and formal complaints resemble the appropriate Title IX process under which Plaintiffs’ reported concerns and formal complaints were required to be handled by law and under University Policy 154. FIRST CAUSE OF ACTION (Discrimination under Title IX, 20 U.S.C. § 1681—Against Defendants Utah Tech, UBHE, USHE, and OCHE) 105. Plaintiffs adopt and fully incorporate the allegations of the preceding paragraphs as if they were set forth herein. 106. Utah Tech and the UBHE, USHE, and OCHE, both through their own actions, and through the actions of Defendants Williams, Sharp, Madsen, and Black, subjected Plaintiffs to discriminatory and disparate treatment and failed to follow the protections required by Title IX. 107. As employees of a Utah public institution of higher education, Plaintiffs are members of a protected group, they were subject to unwelcome harassment and discrimination by Utah Tech’s leaders and administrators, the harassment and discrimination was based on sex, and because of the severity and pervasiveness of the harassment, discrimination and retaliation, the terms and conditions of Plaintiffs’ employment was altered. 108. Utah Tech and the UBHE, USHE, and OCHE demonstrated deliberate indifference to Plaintiffs’ complaints of the individual Defendants’ sexual harassment and misconduct. Utah Tech and the UBHE, USHE, and OCHE had knowledge of this misconduct, 30 4854-3348-0433, v. 15 �Case 4:24-cv-00091-DN-PK Document 2 Filed 11/07/24 PageID.32 Page 31 of 42 and their responses to Defendants’ known acts of harassment and discrimination was clearly unreasonable in light of the known circumstances. SECOND CAUSE OF ACTION (Retaliation under Title IX, 20 U.S.C. § 1681, 34 C.F.R. § 106.71 Against Defendants Utah Tech, UBHE, USHE, and OCHE) 109. Plaintiffs adopt and fully incorporate the preceding allegations as if they were set forth herein. 110. Plaintiffs participated in a protected activity under federal law when they reported and filed sexual harassment complaints internally with Utah Tech under University Policy 154 and Policy 164, and when Plaintiffs filed complaints externally with the Equal Employment Opportunity Office (“EEOC”) and the Office of Civil Rights (“OCR”) by the required 180-day deadlines. 111. Utah Tech subjected Plaintiffs to adverse employment actions by, among other things, failing to provide supportive measures to all Plaintiffs and failing to mitigate the hostile work environment for all Plaintiffs; placing Plaintiff Broadbent on involuntary leave and continuing said leave indefinitely; causing Plaintiff Broadbent to be excluded from her role in the OGC, on University Council, on Cabinet, and as an advisor to the Board of Trustees; causing Plaintiff Broadbent to miss professional development opportunities; declining to use Plaintiff Rasband in his capacity within the OGC and as “team lead” in Broadbent’s absence; and by denying Plaintiff Sainsbury adequate supervision and support in her professional responsibilities, as well as detrimentally impacting her professional development opportunities. 112. Utah Tech retaliated against Plaintiffs through the actions of Lacourse and Pedersen for Plaintiffs’ protected activities of responding to Title IX incidents, enforcing compliance with Title IX, and advising and providing oversight over the University Title IX 31 4854-3348-0433, v. 15 �Case 4:24-cv-00091-DN-PK Document 2 Filed 11/07/24 PageID.33 Page 32 of 42 processes, by Lacourse’s and Pedersen’s misconduct in their August 2023 meeting with Plaintiff Rasband. 113. Utah Tech retaliated against Plaintiffs through the actions of Williams for Plaintiffs’ protected activities of responding to Title IX incidents, enforcing compliance with Title IX, and advising and providing oversight over the University Title IX processes, when Williams created and delivered an innately sexual display of vegetables and accompanying note containing sexual innuendo attributing the obscene display to Plaintiffs; and when Williams deceived Plaintiff Broadbent about his involvement in the November 8, 2023 delivery during and after their November 13, 2023 meeting in which she reported Plaintiffs’ concerns to him; and when Williams subsequently attempted to silence Plaintiffs by seeking to meet with Plaintiffs Rasband and Sainsbury to assure them their feelings of humiliation were not real, and that they did not need to be concerned about their reputational damage as a result of the public dissemination of the vulgar and defamatory delivery. 114. Utah Tech retaliated against Plaintiffs through the actions of Sharp and his UMAC team for Plaintiffs’ protected activities of responding to Title IX incidents enforcing compliance with Title IX (including the September 2021 Incident involving the sexual comments posted in the UMAC breakroom), and advising and providing oversight over the University Title IX processes by their misconduct in November, 2023 and during the University’s investigations. 115. The adverse actions suffered by Plaintiffs were caused by Defendants in direct response to Plaintiffs’ protected activity. 32 4854-3348-0433, v. 15 �Case 4:24-cv-00091-DN-PK Document 2 Filed 11/07/24 PageID.34 Page 33 of 42 THIRD CAUSE OF ACTION (Discrimination Based on Sex under Title VII, 42 U.S.C. § 2000e, et. seq – Broadbent and Sainsbury Against Utah Tech) 116. Plaintiffs adopt and fully incorporate the preceding allegations as if they were set forth herein. 117. Broadbent and Sainsbury are members of a protected class, are two of very few female administrators on campus, and have been subjected to unwelcome harassment and discrimination by Utah Tech’s leaders and administrators, the harassment and discrimination was based on sex, and because of the pervasiveness of the harassment, the harassment and discrimination altered their employment and created an abusive working environment. FOURTH CAUSE OF ACTION (Discrimination Based on Race under Title VII, 42 U.S.C. § 2000e, et. seq – Sainsbury Against Utah Tech) 118. Plaintiffs adopt and fully incorporate the preceding allegations as if they were set forth herein. 119. Sainsbury is a member of a protected class, was subjected to unwelcome harassment and discrimination by Utah Tech’s leaders and administrators, the harassment and discrimination was based on Sainsbury’s race, and because of the pervasiveness of the harassment, the harassment and discrimination altered her employment and created an abusive working environment. FIFTH CAUSE OF ACTION (Discrimination Based on National Origin under Title VII, 42 U.S.C. § 2000e, et. seq – Sainsbury Against Utah Tech) 120. Plaintiffs adopt and fully incorporate the preceding allegations as if they were set forth herein. 33 4854-3348-0433, v. 15 �Case 4:24-cv-00091-DN-PK Document 2 Filed 11/07/24 PageID.35 Page 34 of 42 121. Sainsbury is a member of a protected class, was subjected to unwelcome harassment and discrimination by Utah Tech’s leaders and administrators, the harassment and discrimination was based on Sainsbury’s race, and because of the pervasiveness of the harassment, the harassment and discrimination altered her employment and created an abusive working environment. SIXTH CAUSE OF ACTION (Retaliation under Title VII, 42 U.S.C. § 2000e et seq. for Reporting Sex Based Discrimination – Broadbent and Sainsbury Against Utah Tech) 122. Plaintiffs adopt and fully incorporate the preceding allegations as if they were set forth herein. 123. Broadbent and Sainsbury, two of the very few female administrators on campus, participated in a protected activity under federal law when they reported and filed sexual harassment and discrimination complaints with Utah Tech. 124. Utah Tech subjected Broadbent and Sainsbury to adverse employment actions by, among other things, failing to provide supportive measures to all and failing to mitigate the hostile work environment for Broadbent and Sainsbury, placing Broadbent on involuntary leave, causing Broadbent to be excluded from her role in the OGC, causing Broadbent to miss professional development opportunities, and denying Sainsbury support in her professional responsibilities. 125. These adverse actions were caused by Defendants in direct response to Broadbent’s and Sainsbury’s protected activity. SEVENTH CAUSE OF ACTION (Retaliation under Title VII, 42 U.S.C. § 2000e et seq. for Reporting Race Based Discrimination – Sainsbury Against Utah Tech) 34 4854-3348-0433, v. 15 �Case 4:24-cv-00091-DN-PK Document 2 Filed 11/07/24 PageID.36 Page 35 of 42 126. Plaintiffs adopt and fully incorporate the preceding allegations as if they were set forth herein. 127. Sainsbury participated in a protected activity under federal law when she reported and filed race discrimination complaints. 128. Utah Tech subjected Sainsbury to adverse employment actions by, among other things, failing to mitigate the hostile work environment for Sainsbury and denying Sainsbury support in her professional responsibilities. 129. These adverse actions were caused by Defendants in direct response to Sainsbury’s protected activity. EIGHTH CAUSE OF ACTION (Retaliation under Title VII, 42 U.S.C. § 2000e et seq. for Reporting National Origin Based Discrimination – Sainsbury Against Utah Tech) 130. Plaintiffs adopt and fully incorporate the preceding allegations as if they were set forth herein. 131. Sainsbury participated in a protected activity under federal law when she reported and filed national origin discrimination complaints. 132. Utah Tech subjected Sainsbury to adverse employment actions by, among other things, failing to mitigate the hostile work environment for Sainsbury and denying Sainsbury support in her professional responsibilities. 133. These adverse actions were caused by Defendants in direct response to Sainsbury’s protected activity. NINTH CAUSE OF ACTION (Defamation per se—Against Defendants Utah Tech, Williams, Sharp, Beatty, Lacourse, Pedersen, Madsen, Schmidt, Black, Ulrich, and Wilson) 35 4854-3348-0433, v. 15 �Case 4:24-cv-00091-DN-PK Document 2 Filed 11/07/24 PageID.37 Page 36 of 42 134. Plaintiffs adopt and fully incorporate the preceding allegations as if they were set forth herein. 135. Defendant Williams defamed Plaintiffs when he falsely ascribed Plaintiffs’ names to a note containing sexual innuendo accompanying an innately vulgar sexual display and delivered the display and note to Sharp. 136. Williams’ ascription was false, intentional, injurious, unprivileged, and published to third parties. 137. Williams acted within his scope of employment as president of Utah Tech when he typed the note with Plaintiffs’ names on it in the presidential residence, and delivered the vulgar display and “zuweenie” note with Plaintiffs’ names falsely ascribed to the front porch of VP Sharp. 138. Williams further acted within the course and scope of his employment when he denied his involvement to Sharp immediately after making the November 8, 2023 delivery when contacted about it by Sharp, which denial resulted in Sharp’s dissemination of the vulgar display and “zuweenie” note which Williams ascribed to Plaintiffs. 139. Williams’ deceit to Plaintiff Broadbent in their November 13, 2023 meeting and his statements to White immediately following that meeting, contributed to, and resulted in, additional defamation to Plaintiffs. 140. Utah Tech, Landward, Wilson, and the UBHE, USHE, and OCHE knew of Williams’ misconduct and condoned it by providing him a highly favorable separation agreement in lieu of discipline. 141. Defendant Sharp defamed Plaintiffs when he disseminated the obscene delivery and sexual innuendo note to Beatty on November 8, 2023, to 11 full-time employees on Sharp’s 36 4854-3348-0433, v. 15 �Case 4:24-cv-00091-DN-PK Document 2 Filed 11/07/24 PageID.38 Page 37 of 42 UMAC team on November 8 and 9, 2023 via a Group Chat, and to Defendant Walton during the November 10, 2023 Board of Trustees business meeting, as well as potentially to others, after receiving the November 8, 2023, obscene delivery from Williams. 142. Defendants Sharp, Madsen, Schmidt, Black, and Ulrich defamed Plaintiffs when they contributed knowingly false comments about Plaintiffs and supporting the false attribution of the obscene delivery to Sharp on the lewd November 8-9, 2023, UMAC Group Chat, in furtherance of the false, intentional, injurious, and unprivileged, publication of Williams’ vulgar display delivery. 143. Defendants Sharp and Beatty defamed Plaintiffs when they attributed the vulgar display and note with sexual innuendo delivery to Plaintiffs in front of others at the November 10, 2023, Utah Tech Board of Trustees’ luncheon and on other occasions. 144. These repeated untruthful attributions of the vulgar display and note with sexual innuendo purportedly being from Plaintiffs, in front of Plaintiffs’ peers and colleagues, were false, intentional, injurious, unprivileged, and published to third parties. 145. Utah Tech, Landward, Wilson, and the UBHE, USHE, and OCHE knew of Williams’, Sharp’s, and Beatty’s misconduct, and condoned it by failing to take immediate action to stop it and prevent its recurrence, and by allowing these Defendants to continue using University resources and media channels to further their own names and reputations. 146. Wilson’s comments to White seeking to have Plaintiff Broadbent fired, both before and after White placed her on involuntary leave, were false, intentional, injurious, unprivileged, and published to a third party, White. 147. Upon information and belief, Utah Tech and/or one or more of the individual Defendants or John and Jane Doe Defendants circulated a false rumor on and off campus that 37 4854-3348-0433, v. 15 �Case 4:24-cv-00091-DN-PK Document 2 Filed 11/07/24 PageID.39 Page 38 of 42 Plaintiff Broadbent and/or OGC harassed Plaintiff Sainsbury. This false rumor was intentional, injurious, unprivileged, and published to third parties. 148. On or about March 20, 2024, Wilson made false and retaliatory statements about Plaintiffs to the UBHE Audit Committee which were intentional, injurious, and unprivileged. 149. Wilson’s false statements are inherently harmful to Plaintiffs given their professional roles. 150. The false attributions to Plaintiffs of the vulgar display and note containing sexual innuendo, as well as the false rumor about OGC and/or Plaintiff Broadbent allegedly harassing Plaintiff Sainsbury, charges the Plaintiffs with conduct that is incompatible with the exercise of their offices and professions at Utah Tech, and they are inherently harmful to Plaintiffs, given their positions and responsibilities in Utah Tech’s OGC and the OEC & TIX. 151. Plaintiffs have suffered damages as a result of the aforenamed Defendants’ actions. TENTH CAUSE OF ACTION (False Light—Against All Defendants) 152. Plaintiffs adopt and fully incorporate the preceding allegations as if they were set forth herein. 153. Defendants gave publicity to matters concerning Plaintiffs that has placed the Plaintiffs before the public in a false light. 154. The false light in which Plaintiffs have been placed would be highly offensive to a reasonable person. 155. Defendants had knowledge of, or acted in reckless disregard as to, the falsity of the publicized matters and the false light in which Plaintiffs would be placed. 156. Plaintiffs have suffered damages as a result of Defendants’ actions. 38 4854-3348-0433, v. 15 �Case 4:24-cv-00091-DN-PK Document 2 Filed 11/07/24 PageID.40 Page 39 of 42 ELEVENTH CAUSE OF ACTION (Breach of Contract- Plaintiffs Against Defendant Utah Tech) 157. Plaintiffs adopt and fully incorporate the preceding allegations as if they were set forth herein. 158. Utah Tech has a contract with each of the Plaintiffs requiring it to afford each Plaintiff with timely, neutral and unbiased grievance processes. 159. Utah Tech breached its contracts with Plaintiffs by failing to honor its obligations to provide Plaintiffs with timely, adequate and impartial grievance processes as outlined in the University’s policies and guidelines. 160. Plaintiffs have suffered damages as a result of Utah Tech’s breach of contract. TWELFTH CAUSE OF ACTION (Breach of Contract– Broadbent against Defendant Utah Tech) 161. Plaintiffs adopt and fully incorporate the preceding allegations as if set they were forth herein. 162. Utah Tech has a contract with Plaintiff Broadbent requiring it to provide her professional development opportunities. 163. Utah Tech breached its contract with Plaintiff Broadbent by failing to support her in her professional development as required by University Policy 358. Since she was forced out on involuntary administrative leave over eight months ago, Plaintiff Broadbent has missed multiple professional development opportunities. Despite Utah Tech’s express duty to support Plaintiff Broadbent’s professional development per Policy 358, the University has repeatedly prevented her from key development opportunities by placing her on, and making her remain on, involuntary leave with an indeterminate, University-controlled end date for said leave. 39 4854-3348-0433, v. 15 �Case 4:24-cv-00091-DN-PK Document 2 Filed 11/07/24 PageID.41 Page 40 of 42 164. Plaintiff Broadbent has suffered damages as a result of Utah Tech’s breach of contract. THIRTEENTH CAUSE OF ACTION (Tortious Interference with Contract– Against Defendants Williams, Sharp, Lacourse, Beatty, Walton, White, Wilson, Rosenberg, Landward, Adams, and Hall) 165. Plaintiffs adopt and fully incorporate the preceding allegations as if they were set forth herein. 166. Utah Tech has a contract with Plaintiffs. 167. Utah Tech breached its contract with Plaintiffs by failing to honor its obligations to support Plaintiffs with adequate and impartial grievance processes as outlined in the University’s Policy guidelines. 168. Defendants Williams, Sharp, Lacourse, Beatty, Walton, Pedersen, White, Wilson, Rosenberg, Landward, Adams, and Hall tortiously interfered with Plaintiffs’ contracts through improper means and inhibited their abilities to fulfill their employment obligations to Utah Tech, by Defendants conducting or contributing to a sham investigation and grievance process in response to Plaintiffs’ complaints; by making defamatory, false, injurious, and disparaging statements; by engaging in retaliatory conduct; and/or by withholding evidence; and/or by being dishonest in the internal investigation processes. 169. Moreover, by placing and requiring Plaintiff Broadbent to remain on involuntary leave, declining to use Plaintiff Rasband in his capacity within the OGC, and excluding Plaintiff Sainsbury from her responsibilities and opportunities while denying her proper supervisory support, Defendant White has inhibited Plaintiffs’ ability to fulfill their employment obligations to Utah Tech. 40 4854-3348-0433, v. 15 �Case 4:24-cv-00091-DN-PK Document 2 Filed 11/07/24 PageID.42 Page 41 of 42 170. Plaintiffs have suffered damages as a result of Defendants’ tortious interference with their contracts. FOURTEENTH CAUSE OF ACTION (Intentional or Negligent Infliction of Emotional Distress–Against Defendants Williams, Sharp, Beatty, Walton, Lacourse, Pedersen, White, Rosenberg, Landward, Adams, Wilson, Madsen, Hall, Schmidt, Black, and Ulrich) 171. Plaintiffs adopt and fully incorporate the preceding allegations as if they were set forth herein. 172. Defendants Williams, Sharp, Beatty, Walton, Lacourse, Pedersen, White, Rosenberg, Landward, Adams, Wilson, Madsen, Hall, Schmidt, Black, and Ulrich intentionally or negligently inflicted emotional distress on Plaintiffs. 173. By ascribing the vulgar display to Plaintiffs in front of their peers and colleagues, Williams, Sharp, Beatty, Walton, Madsen, Schmidt, Black, and Ulrich intentionally engaged in outrageous conduct with the purpose of inflicting emotional distress. 174. By their acts, omissions, and communications to Plaintiffs, Defendants Adams, Landward, Rosenberg, and White inflicted emotional distress on Plaintiffs. 175. By having Broadbent escorted across campus by Human Resources and immediately required to return her University-issued laptop, ID/access card, keys, and P-Card to Rosenberg, and immediately banishing her from campus, all through no fault of her own, White and Rosenberg intentionally or negligently inflicted emotional distress on the Plaintiffs. 176. Plaintiffs suffered severe physical and emotional distress as a result. 177. At a minimum, Defendants Williams, Sharp, Beatty, Walton, Rosenberg, White, Madsen, Schmidt, Black, and Ulrich unintentionally caused emotional distress to Plaintiffs and should have readily realized that their conduct involved an unreasonable risk of causing such distress. 41 4854-3348-0433, v. 15 �Case 4:24-cv-00091-DN-PK Document 2 Filed 11/07/24 PageID.43 Page 42 of 42 DEMAND FOR JURY TRIAL Plaintiffs request that this matter be tried before a jury. PRAYER FOR RELIEF WHEREFORE, Plaintiffs respectfully request judgment against Defendants, jointly and severally, as follows: A. For judgment on all claims and causes of action against Defendants; B. For an award of all economic and non-economic damages caused by Defendants’ conduct, including compensatory damages, in an amount to be determined at trial, damages for emotional distress, pain and suffering, humiliation, and as applicable, plus interest, in an amount to be determined at trial; C. For an award of punitive damages in an amount to be determined at trial; D. For an award of pre-judgment and post-judgment interest as allowed by law, as applicable; E. For an award of all of Plaintiffs’ attorneys’ fees and costs of suit, including all costs and expenses incurred through the collection of judgment; F. For an award of equitable relief in an amount to be determined at trial; and G. For an award of any other legal or equitable relief as the court deems just and proper. DATED: November 7, 2024. COHNE KINGHORN, P.C. /s/ Lisa R. Petersen Lisa R. Petersen Amy L. Herrington Attorneys for Plaintiffs 42 4854-3348-0433, v. 15 � Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Identifier An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context UTULawsuit2024 Title A name given to the resource UTU Institutional History: Title IX Lawsuit Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource UTU Special Collections and Archives Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource 2024-2025 Description An account of the resource This collection brings together various media pertaining to the Title IX Federal lawsuit against Utah Tech University and former UTU President Richard "Biff" Williams. Included are news articles, Federal Court documents, and UTU President Shane Smeed Email Message, which in part addresses the ongoing issues and culture of the UTU campus. Those seeking more court documents can research at the Federal Court House in Salt Lake City, or by using the online case search database, <a href="https://pacer.psc.uscourts.gov/pscof/registration.jsf">PACER</a>. Format The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource application/PDF Type The nature or genre of the resource Text Language A language of the resource Eng Subject The topic of the resource Title IX Government Documents Biff Williams Rights Information about rights held in and over the resource <ol> <li>News articles are <a href="https://rightsstatements.org/page/InC-EDU/1.0/?language=en">In Copyright-Educational Use Only</a>.</li> <li>UTU Presidential email is public record.</li> <li>Federal court documents are public record.</li> </ol> Rights Holder A person or organization owning or managing rights over the resource. Sun News (news articles) St. George News (news articles) Salt Lake Tribune Is Format Of A related resource that is substantially the same as the described resource, but in another format. Born Digital Extent The size or duration of the resource. 8 MB Source A related resource from which the described resource is derived District Court of Utah PACER Court records database Email List to Employees of Utah Tech University St. George News  Salt Lake Tribune Sun News  Sun News Publisher An entity responsible for making the resource available St George News Sun News Salt Lake Tribune Utah Tech University Federal District Court for Utah Medium The material or physical carrier of the resource. Born Digital Provenance A statement of any changes in ownership and custody of the resource since its creation that are significant for its authenticity, integrity, and interpretation. The statement may include a description of any changes successive custodians made to the resource. UTU Special Collections Staff donation August 2025. Is Part Of A related resource in which the described resource is physically or logically included. Collection UA077 UTU Institutional History. Text A resource consisting primarily of words for reading. Examples include books, letters, dissertations, poems, newspapers, articles, archives of mailing lists. Note that facsimiles or images of texts are still of the genre Text. Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Identifier An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context UA077_TitleIX-02 Title A name given to the resource Complaint Civil No. 4: 24-cv-00091-DN Subject The topic of the resource Court Records District Court of Utah Title Ix Complaint Description An account of the resource Complaint filed in Federal court by Rebecca Broadbent, Jared Rasband, and Hazel Salinsbury again Richard "Biff" Williams and Utah Tech University Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource 2024-11-24 Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Peterson Lisa R. Herrington, Amy L. Publisher An entity responsible for making the resource available Federal Court, District of Utah, Southern Region Bibliographic Citation A bibliographic reference for the resource. Recommended practice is to include sufficient bibliographic detail to identify the resource as unambiguously as possible. Last Name, First Name [or Entity Name]. (Date). “Title”. Collection Identifier, Box #, Folder #. Utah Tech University Special Collections & Archives, URL link. Format The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource application/PDF Type The nature or genre of the resource Text Language A language of the resource Eng Rights Information about rights held in and over the resource Public domain in the United States Medium The material or physical carrier of the resource. Born Digital Extent The size or duration of the resource. 218 KB Is Part Of A related resource in which the described resource is physically or logically included. UA077: UTU Institutional History Source A related resource from which the described resource is derived Utah Tech University Special Collections and Archives. Server/Digital Collections/UA 077 Institutional History https://digital.library.utahtech.edu/files/original/fbea64d92c9a4ce879cb7bc1ba2ad5a1.pdf 1f95731b4dc9df0df968fe3c780bc2e4 PDF Text Text ­®­®¯°±ÿ³µ́°ÿ¶· ¸¹º»¬¼½ÿ¾ª¿½ÿ»«ÀÁªÂÃÀ¬ÄÿŪÃÀƪ«¬ÿǼÁªÿŽ¼ÈÈÀ¿ÿǼÇÿÇÀɬÿ¬¨ÿʶ±ÿȼËÃÌÀ¬ÿ¿È¼À©Ã 012034526 789ÿ 012034526 ������ÿ����ÿ����������ÿ���������ÿ���ÿ���!!�� � ÿ�"�ÿ�#ÿ���ÿ$%&%ÿ'ÿ#��ÿ#"ÿ(���ÿ(���#��)�� �!!� ���#��*ÿ��+ÿ!�+�)��ÿ�!��(� ,-./012ÿ45-667ÿ8-99-0:;ÿ/0;ÿ;-<.=ÿ1=;-><=2ÿ61?:ÿ@/=ÿA<-B=1;-@CDÿE/= ;./??9ÿ/0;Fÿ;?ÿ601Fÿ1=6A;=2ÿ@?ÿ1=9=0;=ÿ@/=ÿ1=;A9@;ÿ?6ÿ-@; -<B=;@->0@-?<ÿ@?ÿE/=ÿG09@ÿH0I=ÿE1-JA<=D KLMNOPÿRSTUVWPÿXÿYMVÿRSWZÿ[S\VÿYNO]U^V_ÿ̀ZSMÿYVaMÿ̀^ObVNPOZcÿO^ÿRZdÿeVfNgVÿf^ÿYMUNPhSciÿjaZdÿkliÿmlmnd opÿ ÿrstuvwxpÿyzwwxuÿ{ÿ|s}~ÿ€ÿ‚ƒ€ÿ„ƒ†ÿ‡~ˆ~{ÿ‰‡ŠzvxŠÿ|s}~ÿ‹€ÿ‚ƒ€ÿ„„Œÿ‡~ˆ~ §¨©©ª«¬ Žvxuÿzÿ}xÿ‡ux‘Šxwvÿswÿ’‘ÿrz“wxvÿ’zŠÿ‘tu”xup€ÿv’xÿv’xw–‡ux‘ŠxwvÿsŽÿ—˜™šÿœžš —Ÿ¡¢£˜¤ÿŠxŠxŠÿvsÿ¥xz}xÿzÿ”Žvÿswÿv’xÿˆzw¦‘ÿ‡su’~ ½¬¬Åô®®ËËËÍÃȬÂÀÎÍ¿¨©®«ªËîªÆÌ¿¼¬À̈«®¯Ï¯Ð®µµ®Ï­®ª¹ºÌ¬¼½º¬ª¿½ºÌ«ÀÁªÂÃÀ¬ÄºÅªÃÀƪ«¬® µ®¯Ñ �jkjklmnÿopqmÿrs tuvwbxeÿd^yeÿwzf{^agfb|ÿ_a^gfi^zbÿ}x{^ÿ_ex~~fyÿ}x}ÿ}fbÿb̀ÿ€rnÿ~xg‚fbÿy~xfƒg 012345267ÿ94 15ÿ�4���ÿ�4��4�3ÿ��2�25��ÿ�1��25ÿ7�ÿ7ÿ�237ÿ�62ÿ�721ÿ5�4643717�1 7 7ÿ2ÿ7��� 7ÿ2�21��62ÿ����5ÿ�27ÿÿ�4�ÿ��7ÿ��ÿ43ÿ452ÿ��1ÿ�2��ÿ�4323�ÿ���ÿ2����673 65ÿÿ��6�ÿ�� 464ÿ116�25ÿ�4�2ÿ� �2ÿ�2647�4 ÿ��6�3452ÿÿ6�72! �2ÿ� 6725ÿ7�ÿ�43ÿ���ÿ�2��ÿ3ÿ���ÿ12��21ÿ�1��ÿ���1ÿ��7� 74267ÿ�1�25�12�ÿ47ÿ345 �1546�ÿ7�ÿÿ���ÿ3 125ÿ�47ÿ� 2ÿ" �7ÿ# �2ÿ�14��62!ÿ�2ÿ7��� 7ÿ3��2ÿ52�44��3 �1�5�2ÿ�1��ÿ��1ÿ�1526ÿ����5ÿ2��ÿ���ÿ�47ÿ���1ÿ12��21�!ÿ$212ÿ12ÿ7��ÿ52�44��3ÿ2�� ��673ÿ%34&ÿ65ÿ��1ÿ� 15'�46646�ÿ�� 464ÿ�1ÿ3ÿ�2ÿ�4�2ÿ7�ÿ ��ÿ47ÿ��1ÿ(���22642!)� ]^_`abÿdefgÿhi *6��ÿ�4��4�3ÿ5456)7ÿ34�6ÿ43ÿ��6ÿ6 �2ÿ7�ÿ72ÿ� �5�ÿ�2�27��2ÿ543���ÿ2ÿ52�4�2125ÿ46 +��2��21ÿ,-,.! /0123ÿ25678ÿ891ÿ:6;<1;ÿ=>?@ÿBCD@ÿEFCGHICJ>KGÿ?ELMLNOPQ R63725ÿ2ÿ��2�25��ÿ34�625ÿ72ÿ�233�2ÿ ��ÿ72ÿ�237�ÿ�1��ÿ7122ÿ�721ÿ37��213ÿSÿ72 �64�21347�)3ÿ7��ÿ77�162�ÿ473ÿ32�65'46'��� 65ÿ77�162�ÿ65ÿ473ÿTUVWXÿZ[ÿ��1546 7�1 � �ÿ43ÿ 1�25ÿ�47ÿ123��6546�ÿ7�ÿ����4673ÿ��ÿ32\� �ÿ�43�65�7! ebb_gpkk„g~baf„y`ƒkz^gk^i‚yxbf̀zkl†l‡kqqk†jk^uv‚bxevb^yev‚zf{^agfb|v_a^gfi^zbk lklˆ � Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Identifier An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context UTULawsuit2024 Title A name given to the resource UTU Institutional History: Title IX Lawsuit Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource UTU Special Collections and Archives Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource 2024-2025 Description An account of the resource This collection brings together various media pertaining to the Title IX Federal lawsuit against Utah Tech University and former UTU President Richard "Biff" Williams. Included are news articles, Federal Court documents, and UTU President Shane Smeed Email Message, which in part addresses the ongoing issues and culture of the UTU campus. Those seeking more court documents can research at the Federal Court House in Salt Lake City, or by using the online case search database, <a href="https://pacer.psc.uscourts.gov/pscof/registration.jsf">PACER</a>. Format The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource application/PDF Type The nature or genre of the resource Text Language A language of the resource Eng Subject The topic of the resource Title IX Government Documents Biff Williams Rights Information about rights held in and over the resource <ol> <li>News articles are <a href="https://rightsstatements.org/page/InC-EDU/1.0/?language=en">In Copyright-Educational Use Only</a>.</li> <li>UTU Presidential email is public record.</li> <li>Federal court documents are public record.</li> </ol> Rights Holder A person or organization owning or managing rights over the resource. Sun News (news articles) St. George News (news articles) Salt Lake Tribune Is Format Of A related resource that is substantially the same as the described resource, but in another format. Born Digital Extent The size or duration of the resource. 8 MB Source A related resource from which the described resource is derived District Court of Utah PACER Court records database Email List to Employees of Utah Tech University St. George News  Salt Lake Tribune Sun News  Sun News Publisher An entity responsible for making the resource available St George News Sun News Salt Lake Tribune Utah Tech University Federal District Court for Utah Medium The material or physical carrier of the resource. Born Digital Provenance A statement of any changes in ownership and custody of the resource since its creation that are significant for its authenticity, integrity, and interpretation. The statement may include a description of any changes successive custodians made to the resource. UTU Special Collections Staff donation August 2025. Is Part Of A related resource in which the described resource is physically or logically included. Collection UA077 UTU Institutional History. Text A resource consisting primarily of words for reading. Examples include books, letters, dissertations, poems, newspapers, articles, archives of mailing lists. Note that facsimiles or images of texts are still of the genre Text. Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Identifier An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context UA077_TitleIX-03 Title A name given to the resource Ex-Utah Tech University President Gave Phallic Gag Gift to his V.P.--One of Many Misconduct Allegations, New Lawsuit Claims Subject The topic of the resource Academic Life Chief Academic Officer Controversy Description An account of the resource New lawsuit claims Biff Williams gave inappropriate gifts to UTU's Vice President. Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource 2024-11-09 Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Samuels, Chris Publisher An entity responsible for making the resource available Salt Lake Tribune Bibliographic Citation A bibliographic reference for the resource. Recommended practice is to include sufficient bibliographic detail to identify the resource as unambiguously as possible. Samuels, Chris. (2024, Oct 10). "Ex-Utah Tech University president gave phallic gag gift to his V.P.--one of many misconduct allegations, new lawsuit claims." Salt Lake Tribune, https://www.sltrib.com/news/education/2024/11/08/ex-utah-tech-university-president/ Format The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource application/PDF Type The nature or genre of the resource Text Language A language of the resource Eng Rights Information about rights held in and over the resource IN COPYRIGHT-EDUCATIONAL USE PERMITTED Medium The material or physical carrier of the resource. Born Digital Extent The size or duration of the resource. 318 KB Is Part Of A related resource in which the described resource is physically or logically included. UA077: UTU Institutional History Source A related resource from which the described resource is derived Utah Tech University Special Collections and Archives. Server/Digital Collections/UA 077 Institutional History https://digital.library.utahtech.edu/files/original/5de83afe0ecaa9871c67a0524acac42c.pdf e7e0268122bca0bbff1fa5b734a88442 PDF Text Text 8/8/25, 6:30 PM Lawsuit against Utah Tech administrators—Title IX breaches – Sun News Daily UTAH TECH UNIVERSITY'S STUDENT NEWS SOURCE | AUGUST 08, 2025  Lawsuit against Utah Tech administrators— Title IX breaches Madisyn Bishop Posted on November 18, 2024 https://sunnewsdaily.com/stories/articles/2024/11/18/lawsuit-against-utah-tech-administrators-title-ix-breaches/ 1/8 �8/8/25, 6:30 PM Lawsuit against Utah Tech administrators—Title IX breaches – Sun News Daily Lindy Blair | Sun News Daily SHARE THIS: Title IX is a federal law that protects faculty, staff and students from discrimination, sexual and non-sexual harassment and retaliation. The specific details of this law change depending on the university, and each university may have a different statement surrounding Title IX. Utah Tech University specifically states that the university is committed to maintaining a safe environment where everyone in the community is treated with respect and dignity. What happens when a law designed to protect those in an educational setting repeatedly fails? On Nov. 9, ABC4 News released a 42-page lawsuit that named administrative faculty and staff members at Utah Tech. The lawsuit stems from a series of Title IX breaches, but the final straw for the plaintiffs was a “gag gift” sent from former president Richard “Biff” Williams. The Salt Lake Tribune reported that this gift included two homegrown eggplants and Williams’ record-breaking zucchini placed strategically to represent a phallus. Williams did not sign his own name on the gift. Instead, he signed the gift—without their consent—from three employees: Rebecca “Becky” Broadbent, general counsel Jared Rasband, senior associate general counsel Hazel Sainsbury, director of equity compliance and Title IX coordinator Many of the incidents outlined in the lawsuit include inappropriate signage on the walls of an office, racially charged jokes and retaliation for reporting these incidents to Title IX. https://sunnewsdaily.com/stories/articles/2024/11/18/lawsuit-against-utah-tech-administrators-title-ix-breaches/ 2/8 �8/8/25, 6:30 PM Lawsuit against Utah Tech administrators—Title IX breaches – Sun News Daily The Salt Lake Tribune met with the three plaintiffs, Broadbent, Rasband and Sainsbury, which is the first time the three spoke to a news source about their lawsuit against Utah Tech. As the Title IX director, Sainsbury told The Tribune the gift had completely undermined everything she does at Utah Tech. Sainsbury said: “What kind of victim is going to approach my office if they believe that I participate in these types of vulgar jokes? How would a victim feel [confident] in my work?” Reporting cases of harassment is protected under this federal law, meaning they should not face retaliation for reporting breaches of Title IX. However, after filing the lawsuit, Broadbent was placed on leave and has been away from her office for nine months, forced to turn in her laptop and key cards. The university still has not made a statement about Broadbent. Rasband told The Tribune he had to watch Broadbent get escorted off campus by two human resources officials with only a five minute notice of her suspension. “She’s sitting there in tears, completely shocked and taken aback,” Rasband said. In the article, Broadbent said during her leave, no one at the university checked on her, which has proven to be a very difficult time period. “There’s a heavy burden for any complainant that brings forward concerns that they feel they have been subjected to misconduct,” Broadbent said. Meanwhile, Williams, who is a defendant in the report, stepped down from his position at Utah Tech in January. After stepping down, Williams was able to live in the presidential home rent-free for six months, as stated in the lawsuit, and was paid from Utah Tech until he obtained his position at Missouri State University. The lawsuit reports that Broadbent spoke to Williams about her concerns; however, he was dismissive and attempted to manipulate and silence her about her concerns, https://sunnewsdaily.com/stories/articles/2024/11/18/lawsuit-against-utah-tech-administrators-title-ix-breaches/ 3/8 �8/8/25, 6:30 PM Lawsuit against Utah Tech administrators—Title IX breaches – Sun News Daily assuring her she was “loved and part of the family.” Sainsbury told The Tribune she was subjected to racist jokes by administrators because “the institution was not prepared for someone like me to do the work so effectively… They’ve attributed malice to my work and compared me to a previous Black administrator that they found to be problematic.” The Utah System of Higher Education is also named in the lawsuit. This is because after the three plaintiffs reported their concerns, USHE intentionally avoided the policies, processes and timelines that should have been afforded to the plaintiffs as employees of public institutions of higher education. Broadbent told The Tribune, “They [USHE] need to stop covering up bad behavior, stop paying off bad actors and start owning up to the need to provide proper oversight of presidents and their administrators.” Jordon Sharp, Julie Chew, Tasha Toy, Travis Rosenberg, Tiffany Wilson and Henrie Walton declined to interview with Sun News Daily about the incidents of the lawsuit. The 42-page report states that Sharp and other team members of the University Marketing and Communications department shared a group chat, replying to the “gag gift.” Jyl Hall, director of public relations and defendant in the lawsuit, said in a statement that UMAC is aware of the complaint filed against Utah Tech and is committed to working with all parties to reach a resolution. Part of the statement said: “The University takes all allegations seriously. We have been actively following established university procedures to thoroughly review any concerns brought to the University’s attention, including hiring neutral third-party professionals to evaluate these complaints, and are taking necessary steps as appropriate.” Nearly a week after ABC4 News released the 42-page lawsuit document, Courtney White, Utah Tech interim president, addressed faculty and staff: https://sunnewsdaily.com/stories/articles/2024/11/18/lawsuit-against-utah-tech-administrators-title-ix-breaches/ 4/8 �8/8/25, 6:30 PM Lawsuit against Utah Tech administrators—Title IX breaches – Sun News Daily This email was sent specifically to faculty and staff at the university, meaning students not working for Utah Tech still have not received a statement, which made some students discouraged by the consistent lack of integrity of the university faculty. Savanna Romero, a senior English major from St. George, said, “It’s kinda sad to me that we deal with this as students, but the issues are a byproduct of immaturity because our highest faculty also don’t know how to act appropriately.” The lack of accountability is a recurring issue the plaintiffs face. The Tribune reported that the three plaintiffs never pictured themselves in this situation, nor did they want to file the lawsuit. “There just needs to be accountability,” Sainsbury said. “That’s what’s been missing out of this whole thing… We have great people at Utah Tech who have devoted themselves to our students, and they deserve a productive, safe place to work.” The Utah Tech chapter of the American Federation of Teachers responded to this lawsuit Nov. 13. The press release states the AFT “strongly condemns all such practices and actions by individuals or governing bodies, past, present and future… Any individual, regardless of position in the university or its governing bodies, who is proven to engage in a pattern of discriminatory, unethical, or illegal actions or who engages in continued behaviors that create a toxic, unsafe, and hostile environment—including retaliatory actions—is unfit to work at or on behalf of Utah Tech University.” https://sunnewsdaily.com/stories/articles/2024/11/18/lawsuit-against-utah-tech-administrators-title-ix-breaches/ 5/8 �8/8/25, 6:30 PM Lawsuit against Utah Tech administrators—Title IX breaches – Sun News Daily James Stein, associate professor of communications, is not connected to the lawsuit but wanted to voice his frustrations. He stated faculty was never informed of this incident, despite asking repeatedly what happened when Williams stepped down, as well as when Micheal Lacourse, provost and vice president of student affairs, was placed on leave. The reason why Lacourse was placed on leave is still unknown, though it is said in the lawsuit he was verbally abusive to Sainsbury. In one meeting, Lacourse allegedly, “pointed a finger at Sainsbury and aggressively slammed his fist on the table, demanding to know ‘who do you think you are!'” Stein said he was simply angry that this was happening, and believed he had an obligation to speak out for those who could not. “As a person with ‘power’ in this university, it is my obligation to do more than just pretend none of this is happening because that is how we got here in the first place,” Stein said. A month after Williams stepped down, White was named the interim president, and Stein said this should have been a more comprehensive search because of the pattern of behavior shown by the current administration. “When we were looking for an interim president, we just went, ‘Who’s available?’ and it turned out to be somebody who is also named in the lawsuit,” Stein said. “Instead of doing a comprehensive search and unpacking why the president stepped down, and who would be a better fit to replace them, don’t you think maybe, perhaps, if we have this pattern of men engaging in inappropriate behavior, then we need a more diverse perspective on leadership?” He said that the university needs to look elsewhere for the next president and the pattern of inappropriate behavior proves that. “If the men in this community have proven that they are incapable of leading, then maybe its time for women to lead, for people who aren’t from this town to lead,” Stein said. Rasband said the new president needs to be somebody with moral courage who will not be afraid to hold people accountable if their behavior does not meet expectations. https://sunnewsdaily.com/stories/articles/2024/11/18/lawsuit-against-utah-tech-administrators-title-ix-breaches/ 6/8 �8/8/25, 6:30 PM Lawsuit against Utah Tech administrators—Title IX breaches – Sun News Daily Broadbent said it needs to be someone who “is not part of the existing boys club [and will] hold people accountable to the values and the policies the university espouses, so when we recruit in students and employees it’s not a facade.” A court date has not been released to the public. Title IX is a federal law that protects everyone from situations like these, and students can still report if they are being discriminated against or harassed. ALSO ON SUN NEWS DAILY DSUSA candidates make pitch to voters in final hours of election Lawsuit against Utah Tech results in faculty resolution, update on presidential search process Explaining free speech at the U Tagged Featured News https://sunnewsdaily.com/stories/articles/2024/11/18/lawsuit-against-utah-tech-administrators-title-ix-breaches/ 7/8 � Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Identifier An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context UTULawsuit2024 Title A name given to the resource UTU Institutional History: Title IX Lawsuit Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource UTU Special Collections and Archives Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource 2024-2025 Description An account of the resource This collection brings together various media pertaining to the Title IX Federal lawsuit against Utah Tech University and former UTU President Richard "Biff" Williams. Included are news articles, Federal Court documents, and UTU President Shane Smeed Email Message, which in part addresses the ongoing issues and culture of the UTU campus. Those seeking more court documents can research at the Federal Court House in Salt Lake City, or by using the online case search database, <a href="https://pacer.psc.uscourts.gov/pscof/registration.jsf">PACER</a>. Format The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource application/PDF Type The nature or genre of the resource Text Language A language of the resource Eng Subject The topic of the resource Title IX Government Documents Biff Williams Rights Information about rights held in and over the resource <ol> <li>News articles are <a href="https://rightsstatements.org/page/InC-EDU/1.0/?language=en">In Copyright-Educational Use Only</a>.</li> <li>UTU Presidential email is public record.</li> <li>Federal court documents are public record.</li> </ol> Rights Holder A person or organization owning or managing rights over the resource. Sun News (news articles) St. George News (news articles) Salt Lake Tribune Is Format Of A related resource that is substantially the same as the described resource, but in another format. Born Digital Extent The size or duration of the resource. 8 MB Source A related resource from which the described resource is derived District Court of Utah PACER Court records database Email List to Employees of Utah Tech University St. George News  Salt Lake Tribune Sun News  Sun News Publisher An entity responsible for making the resource available St George News Sun News Salt Lake Tribune Utah Tech University Federal District Court for Utah Medium The material or physical carrier of the resource. Born Digital Provenance A statement of any changes in ownership and custody of the resource since its creation that are significant for its authenticity, integrity, and interpretation. The statement may include a description of any changes successive custodians made to the resource. UTU Special Collections Staff donation August 2025. Is Part Of A related resource in which the described resource is physically or logically included. Collection UA077 UTU Institutional History. Text A resource consisting primarily of words for reading. Examples include books, letters, dissertations, poems, newspapers, articles, archives of mailing lists. Note that facsimiles or images of texts are still of the genre Text. Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Identifier An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context UA077_TitleIX-05 Title A name given to the resource Lawsuit Against Utah Tech Administrators--Title IX Breaches Subject The topic of the resource Academic Life Title IX Controversy Description An account of the resource a forty-two page lawsuit has been filed against Utah Tech University Administration, with Title IX breaches. Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource 2024-11-18 Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Bishop, Madisyn Publisher An entity responsible for making the resource available St. George News Bibliographic Citation A bibliographic reference for the resource. Recommended practice is to include sufficient bibliographic detail to identify the resource as unambiguously as possible. Bishop, Madisyn. (2024, Nov 18). "Lawsuit against Utah Tech administrators--Title IX breaches." Sun News, https://sunnewsdaily.com/stories/articles/2024/11/18/lawsuit-against-utah-tech-administrators-title-ix-breaches/ Format The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource application/PDF Type The nature or genre of the resource Text Language A language of the resource Eng Rights Information about rights held in and over the resource IN COPYRIGHT-EDUCATIONAL USE PERMITTED Medium The material or physical carrier of the resource. Born Digital Extent The size or duration of the resource. 687 KB Is Part Of A related resource in which the described resource is physically or logically included. UA077: UTU Institutional History Source A related resource from which the described resource is derived Utah Tech University Special Collections and Archives. Server/Digital Collections/UA 077 Institutional History https://digital.library.utahtech.edu/files/original/0b433ea049df0cbaa56d331a59ce0c60.pdf 1caaa0d030f758fb3c98e8760c08b379 PDF Text Text GHGHIJKÿMNOIÿPQ RSTUVWXÿSYSWZUXÿ[XS\ÿ]^_\ÿ̀^UVaXUÿWZÿbS_VaXcÿ̀^UdaVXWdZKÿVefSX^ÿdZÿe`^UWf^ZXWSaÿU^S`_\ÿe`d_^UUÿgÿhVZÿi^TUÿjSWac 0123ÿ1563ÿ07895 81 ÿ10�571ÿ75� ÿ�0 65ÿ�ÿ20�0 1ÿ���ÿ���� F �������ÿ������ÿ0��!ÿ1"#!ÿ$"��%��ÿ�ÿ&�#�%�' $"�(%���( �ÿ�)*��"ÿ( ÿ)$"��*" ���%ÿ�"�$#! )$(#"�� +,-./01ÿ3./456 789:;<ÿ8>ÿ?,1@,A0ÿBCDÿBCBE \XXeUNHHUVZZ^TUfSWack_dlHUXd`W^UHS`XW_a^UHImIJHmOHImHaSTUVWXnSYSWZUXnVXS\nX^_\n`^UVaXUnWZnbS_VaXcn`^UdaVXWdZnVefSX^ndZne`^UWf^ZXWSanU^S`_\ne`d_^UUH OHG �vwvwxyzÿ|}~xÿ€ ‚ƒ„†‡ÿ‚ˆ‚†‰„‡ÿŠ‡‚‹ÿŒŽ‹ÿ„‡„ÿ†‰ÿ‘‚Ž‡’ÿ„“‡†“‰zÿ”•‚‡ÿ“‰ÿ”„†•‰‡†‚ÿ„‚Ž‹ÿ”“Ž„„ÿ–ÿ— ‰ÿ˜ƒ„ÿ™‚†’ 01ÿ31456478ÿ598ÿ8 39ÿ1ÿÿ48�ÿ�86�845ÿ1ÿ�59ÿ0839ÿ�46�8 65��ÿ598ÿ�37�5�ÿ�8458ÿ �8�ÿ1ÿ4ÿ35614 ��4ÿ1�ÿ598ÿ��6465 5614ÿ 58ÿ598ÿ83845ÿ�����8ÿ�� 765�ÿ��6 !859ÿ" �64�ÿ#ÿ�74ÿ$8� ÿ% 6�� &'()*ÿ,'-&. /012ÿ401ÿ56789:;ÿ6=6:>8;ÿ?;6@ÿABC@ÿD2EF1GHE4IÿJKLE2EH4GJ4MGHÿNJHÿG1O1JH1Kÿ4Mÿ401 PQROESTÿH4QK124HTÿUJSQO4IÿJ2KÿH4JUUÿ1VP1GE12S1KÿJÿLQO4EPOESE4IÿMUÿ1F124HW X0EHÿYZ[PJ\1ÿOJNHQE4ÿ2JL1Kÿ]^ÿJKLE2EH4GJ4EF1ÿUJSQO4IÿJ2KÿH4JUUTÿJHÿN1OOÿJHÿ401ÿD4J0 _MJGKÿMUÿ̀E\01GÿaKQSJ4EM2Tÿ401ÿD4J0ÿbIH41LÿMUÿ̀E\01GÿaKQSJ4EM2TÿD4J0ÿX1S0 D2EF1GHE4IÿJ2Kÿ401ÿcUUES1ÿMUÿ401ÿdMLLEHHEM21GÿMUÿ̀E\01GÿaKQSJ4EM2W X0EHÿOJNHQE4ÿNJHÿJÿG1HQO4ÿMUÿG1P1J41KÿKEHSGELE2J4MGITÿ0JGJHHE2\ÿR10JFEMGÿ40J4ÿ40G11 D4J0ÿX1S0ÿ1LPOMI11HÿUJS1KWÿX01H1ÿ1LPOMI11HÿN1G1e f1R1SSJÿg_1ShIiÿ_GMJKR124Tÿ\121GJOÿSMQ2H1O jJG1KÿfJHRJ2KTÿH12EMGÿJHHMSEJ41ÿ\121GJOÿSMQ2H1O `Jk1OÿbJE2HRQGITÿKEG1S4MGÿMUÿ1lQE4IÿSMLPOEJ2S1ÿJ2KÿA:;5BÿmnÿSMMGKE2J4MG X0EHÿOJNHQE4ÿH01KÿOE\04ÿM2ÿN0J4ÿNJHÿ\ME2\ÿM2ÿE2HEK1ÿD4J0ÿX1S0WÿoÿSMQG4ÿKJ41ÿ0JHÿI14 4MÿR1ÿG1O1JH1Kÿ4Mÿ401ÿPQROESTÿ1F12ÿJU41Gÿ401ÿZpZYÿH1L1H41Gÿ12K1KW `MN1F1GTÿLJ2Iÿ40E2\Hÿ0JF1ÿS0J2\1KÿJGMQ2KÿSJLPQHÿHE2S1ÿ401ÿG1O1JH1ÿMUÿ40EH OJNHQE4WÿqEGH4TÿlQEShOIÿJU41Gÿ401ÿOJNHQE4ÿNJHÿG1O1JH1KTÿ401ÿD4J0ÿX1S0ÿqJSQO4Iÿb12J41 PGMPMH1KÿJÿG1HMOQ4EM2ÿ4MÿUJSQO4IÿL1LR1GHÿG1\JGKE2\ÿJKLE2EH4GJ4EM2W X01ÿPGMPMH1KÿG1HMOQ4EM2ÿE2SOQK1KÿJÿFM41ÿMUÿ2MÿSM2UEK12S1ÿE2ÿJKLE2EH4GJ4EM2ÿNE40 1V1SQ4EF1ÿKQ4E1HÿE2ÿO1JK1GH0EPÿPMHE4EM2HÿN0ES0ÿE2SOQK1Ke r241GELÿPG1HEK124ÿdMQG421Iÿ/0E41 sGMFMH4ÿtES01JOÿuJSMQGH1 ‹‡‡”„}ww„‰‰ƒ„•‚†’šŽ“›w„‡“†„w‚‡†Ž„wxœxywœ~wxœw‚ƒ„†‡‚ˆ‚†‰„‡‡‚‹‡Ž‹„‡„†‰‘‚Ž‡’„“‡†“‰”•‚‡“‰”„†•‰‡†‚„‚Ž‹”“Ž„„w xwv �efefghiÿklmgÿno pqrstuvÿqwquxsvÿyvqzÿ{|}zÿ~|stvsÿuxÿ€q}tvÿ~|s‚tvu‚xiÿtƒ„qv|ÿ‚xÿƒ~|su„|xvuqÿs|q~}zÿƒ~‚}|ssÿÿ†txÿ‡|rsÿˆqu 012ÿ4156678ÿ9 1ÿ 1��1�6ÿ��ÿ�6��1�6ÿ5��5 � �����ÿ��5 8ÿ9 1ÿ 1��1�6ÿ��ÿ�5�16��ÿ5��ÿ����� 56�� �1� 1ÿ�526��8ÿ5���65�6ÿ6�ÿ6�1ÿ 1��1�6ÿ��ÿ��91��1�6ÿ5�� �����67ÿ1256���ÿ5��ÿ�61 �ÿ�1�ÿ��ÿ�65�� �59�ÿ���1��1�8ÿ1�1�691ÿ� 16�ÿ��ÿ���5�ÿ1��� 1� ÿ�16��ÿ��ÿ6��ÿ � ��1�ÿ!"#$%&'($)ÿ�6561�* +,-../0123ÿ25ÿ6ÿ0.,372/ÿ25ÿ31.ÿ-.0289372/ÿ:9;8701.<ÿ7/ÿ=>?ÿABCDÿEBF?ÿ=GHIJK?ÿL2MNÿOPQ OROPN ��1ÿ!"#$%&'($)ÿ��6��1�8ÿ�57��ÿ6�1ÿ�5�267ÿ�1�561ÿS22ÿ�116ÿS6�ÿ6�1ÿ�1�152ÿ�5�267 T�9UÿVW8ÿVWVXÿ6�ÿ1522ÿ��ÿ6�1ÿ��22�S��ÿ56���*ÿ191S��ÿ6�1ÿ5221�56���ÿ5�5��6ÿ6�1 ��91�67ÿ5��ÿ1��� ��ÿ5 ���65�2678ÿ�61��6�1���ÿ �616���ÿ��ÿS��621�2�S1�8 ��227ÿ��5 ��ÿ5��ÿ�1652��ÿ5ÿ25�ÿ5��1����ÿ5ÿ1���6�1�6ÿ6�ÿ���61 ��ÿ5 1�161�ÿS��251ÿ�26�18ÿ5��ÿ5���S21����ÿ6�1ÿ5 �2��7ÿ���1�ÿ�7ÿY��6�17 ��61ÿ6�ÿ�5�267ÿ5��ÿ�65��U ���16ÿ�5228ÿ5���65�6ÿ ��1���ÿ��ÿ����� 56��ÿ5��ÿ�5�267ÿ�1�56�ÿ��ÿ6�1 ����� 56��ÿ�1 56�1�68ÿ�5�*ÿZ�1ÿ���[6ÿ\��6ÿ��ÿ6��ÿ��ÿ�1�52�ÿ��ÿ�5�267]ÿS1ÿ�� 65�1ÿ�6�ÿ����156��ÿ6�1ÿ�6��1�6[�ÿ��1��Uÿ�61ÿS1ÿ�5Sÿ6�1ÿ�1S�ÿ11ÿ���ÿ6�1 ���ÿT1S�8ÿ^ÿ15�1�ÿ��6ÿ6�ÿ��ÿ�1�561ÿ 1��1�68ÿ 1��1�6_1216ÿ5��ÿ�6�1 �1��1�ÿ5��ÿ�5�8ÿ̀a�ÿ�6��1�6�ÿ51ÿ522��ÿ6��ÿ��68ÿS1ÿ5���6ÿ�1ÿb�16Ucd zvvƒslffstxx|rs„qu‰}‚Šfsv‚~u|sfq~vu}|sfg‹ghf‹mfg‹fqrstuvŒqwquxsvŒtvqzŒv|}zŒ~|stvsŒuxŒ€q}tvŒ~|s‚tvu‚xŒtƒ„qv|Œ‚xŒƒ~|su„|xvuqŒs|q~}zŒƒ~‚}|ssf kfe �2323456ÿ89:4ÿ;< =>?@ABCÿ>D>BE@CÿFC>GÿHIJGÿKI@ALC@ÿBEÿM>JALCNÿKI@OLACBOE6ÿAPQ>CIÿOEÿPKI@BQIECB>Lÿ@I>KJGÿPKOJI@@ÿRÿSAEÿTI?@ÿU>BLN 01234ÿ67289 ÿ89ÿ1674ÿ71ÿ23ÿ437��2879�ÿ23ÿ1���2�ÿ39 23ÿ�32ÿ�82ÿ�371143�ÿ� 9�� 4�� �2 ÿ��23�ÿ71ÿ�8 34ÿ����2879ÿ� 9�3��74�ÿ27ÿ3��43 ÿ2384ÿ�79�349ÿ9� �842879ÿ174ÿÿ93�ÿ�438�392� � ��ÿ 8�ÿ82ÿ� ÿÿ77�ÿ7��742�982�ÿ27ÿ�332ÿ9�ÿ�8�� ÿ2384ÿ�79�349ÿ�82ÿ8�ÿ9� 23�ÿ 63ÿ�339ÿ�33289 ÿ43 ��4��ÿ�82ÿ23ÿ�7 4�ÿ71ÿ24�233ÿ89�3ÿ2384ÿ89828� �33289 � 3ÿ! ���2�ÿ�39 23ÿ�7ÿ7�3�ÿ27ÿ�48� 3ÿ23ÿ �ÿ�32�339ÿ��89824274�ÿ2��392� 1���2�ÿ9�ÿ211�ÿ� ��ÿ 8�ÿ23�ÿ43ÿ24�89 ÿ27ÿ18�43ÿ7�2ÿ7�ÿ27ÿ�7���7423ÿ9�ÿ�3ÿ89 23ÿ �3ÿ�93ÿ4234ÿ2 9ÿ 689 ÿ1���2�ÿ9�ÿ2��392ÿ89ÿ793ÿ�93ÿ9�ÿ��898242879 89ÿ23ÿ7234�ÿ 3ÿ�7 4�ÿ71ÿ24�233ÿ ÿ�339ÿ�74"89 ÿ�82ÿ23ÿ1���2�ÿ39 23ÿ27 437�63ÿ28� 3ÿ3�79�ÿ� 9 3ÿ7���443�ÿ��489 ÿ23ÿ#$#%ÿ�89234ÿ�43 "�ÿ&3��ÿ#%�ÿ� 39ÿ23ÿ�2 '7 4�ÿ71ÿ�8 34ÿ����2879ÿ3� 8�3�ÿ23ÿ����ÿ�7���982�ÿ27ÿ997�9�3ÿÿ93� �438�3928�ÿ3 4�ÿ�7��82233� �2��392ÿ�7��ÿ�438�392�ÿ'3��ÿ� 23�ÿÿ39874ÿ�7���98�2879ÿ� (74ÿ147�ÿ��722� �3� 048)79 �ÿ 8�ÿ 3ÿ� ÿ�4�483�ÿ23�ÿ�343ÿ32��8 89 ÿÿ93�ÿ3 4�ÿ�7��82233� *9ÿ28ÿ3� 8��ÿ�'��ÿ997�9�3�ÿ2 2ÿ82ÿ �ÿ32��8 3�ÿÿ+$ÿ�3��34ÿ3 4� �7��82233ÿ27ÿ3��3�823ÿ23ÿ3 4�ÿ174ÿÿ93�ÿ�438�392� !�4234�743�ÿ23ÿ�7��82233ÿ89����3�ÿ�2 ÿ3�ÿ9�ÿ�2 ÿ'7 4�ÿ71ÿ�8 34ÿ����2879 24�233ÿ1���2��ÿ211�ÿ2��392�ÿ���98�ÿ��898242879ÿ9�ÿ23ÿ�7��ÿ�7���982��ÿ��ÿ71 � 8�ÿ�8��ÿ�3�8�3ÿ� 7ÿ23ÿ93�ÿ�438�392ÿ8� 33ÿ�3��34ÿ�343, & 99�ÿ*�79�ÿ3 4�ÿ�7��82233ÿ�7-� 84ÿ9�ÿ�2 ÿ'7 4�ÿ71ÿ�8 34 ����2879ÿ�3��34 &3639ÿ. ��79 ���ÿ3 4�ÿ�7��82233ÿ�7-� 84ÿ9�ÿ�2 ÿ3�ÿ�7 4�ÿ71 24�233ÿ�3��34 /39�8ÿ'��"�3��ÿ�2 ÿ3�ÿ�843�274ÿ71ÿ�7���982�ÿ43�2879ÿ9�ÿ2�328� �363�7��392ÿ7118�34 03998134ÿ18��87�ÿ�2 ÿ3�ÿ! ���2�ÿ�39 23ÿ�438�392-3�3�2ÿ9�ÿ�87�7 � �4713 74 079ÿ17��ÿ�'��ÿ�3��34 '3��ÿ� 23�ÿ�2 ÿ3�ÿ2��392ÿ�7��ÿ�438�392 GCCP@933@AEEI?@Q>BLNVJOW3@COKBI@3>KCBJLI@34X453X:34X3L>?@ABCY>D>BE@CYAC>GYCIJGYKI@ALC@YBEYM>JALCNYKI@OLACBOEYAPQ>CIYOEYPKI@BQIECB>LY@I>KJGYPKOJI@@3 Z32 �FGFGHIJÿLMNHÿOP QRSTUVWÿRXRVYTWÿZWR[ÿ\]^[ÿ_]TUẀTÿVYÿaR^UẀbÿ_]TcÙWVcYJÿUdeRW]ÿcYÿd_]TVe]YWVRÿ̀T]R_^[ÿd_c^]TTÿfÿgUYÿh]STÿiRV̀b 012ÿ4567892ÿ17 25ÿ�1�ÿ�6��ÿ1� 5258��1�9�ÿ�9�17ÿ0686��ÿ� ��6�� �62�6�ÿ1� 5258��1�9� �5��ÿ4�6ÿ�1�ÿ�9�6�29��8ÿ86259�ÿ1��586�ÿ9�ÿ6� �1�592 �18�1ÿ�9�ÿ18858�12�ÿ�5�6ÿ��685�62�ÿ12�ÿ��56�ÿ�9 �7512�6ÿ9��5�6�ÿ1�ÿ�1� �6�� �9�2ÿ�57758ÿ���ÿ69��6ÿ�5��ÿ 121�6� !2ÿ��6ÿ6 157ÿ��6ÿ"#$ÿ8�1�6�ÿ��6�ÿ2�6�8�99�ÿ��6ÿ5�9��12�6ÿ9�ÿ��58ÿ��1285�592ÿ12� %&12�ÿ�9ÿ�6188�6ÿ�9 ÿ��1�ÿ6�6��ÿ6��9��ÿ58ÿ'652�ÿ 1�6ÿ�9ÿ8676��ÿ1ÿ��685�62�ÿ&�9ÿ&577 761�ÿ'�ÿ6(1 �76ÿ676�1�6ÿ��8ÿ 588592ÿ9�ÿ5229�1�592ÿ8��62���62ÿ��6ÿ�1 � 8 �9 25��ÿ12�ÿ����6�ÿ1��12�6ÿ�12�8)92ÿ8��62�)�9�86�ÿ761�252��* +9�69�6�ÿ92ÿ�12�ÿ,ÿ"#$ÿ�67�ÿ1ÿ-.//01122ÿ.4ÿ152ÿ65.72ÿ 66�52�ÿ� �52�ÿ&�5�� ��6�ÿ�58�886�ÿ��6ÿ�6189252�ÿ'6�52�ÿ��61�52�ÿ1ÿ26&ÿ�9 5��66� �1�ÿ��8�6 ÿ9�ÿ#5��6�ÿ$� �1�592ÿ'91��ÿ 6 '6�ÿ�1�56�ÿ��1�68ÿ���ÿ815�ÿ��6�ÿ&6�6 �6�6� 526�ÿ�9ÿ�6�928�5��6ÿ1ÿ26&ÿ�9 5��66ÿ�9ÿ�1�6ÿ1ÿ��68�ÿ�6�8�6��5�6ÿ12�ÿ��68� 8�1��� ��1�68ÿ815�9ÿ%��6ÿ861���ÿ�9 5��66ÿ58ÿ��9�66�52�ÿ92ÿ12ÿ6(�6�5�6�ÿ'1858ÿ&5��ÿ��6 �917ÿ�9ÿ1��952�ÿ1ÿ26&ÿ��685�62�ÿ'�ÿ61�7�ÿ+1����ÿ��1�ÿ1�61ÿ9�ÿ��6ÿ8�1�6ÿ��1� �9 25��ÿ��1�ÿ25�6�85��ÿ�6: 5�68ÿ��6ÿ�1�6ÿ12�ÿ1��62�592ÿ�9�ÿ1ÿ��685�62�;ÿ��6�6�9�6 ��6ÿ�6�58592ÿ�18ÿ'662ÿ 1�6ÿ�9ÿ6(�6�5�6ÿ��6ÿ861����ÿ!ÿ&12�ÿ�9ÿ�65�6�1�6ÿ'�ÿ29ÿ7688 �968ÿ��1�ÿ 612ÿ��1�ÿ5��8ÿ1ÿ� ��56�ÿ861����* �5��ÿ��6ÿ�9� 1�592ÿ9�ÿ��6ÿ26&ÿ�9 5��66ÿ1ÿ6(�6�5�6�ÿ10/270<2ÿ&18ÿ1789ÿ��61�6� &�5��ÿ��9�986�ÿ1ÿ26&ÿ��685�62�ÿ'�ÿ+1���ÿ=>=?�ÿ#9&6�6�ÿ��6ÿ�9 5��66ÿ&18ÿ29� ��6ÿ927�ÿ��52�ÿ��1�ÿ��12�6�ÿ&5��ÿ��6ÿ��685�62�517ÿ861����ÿ��6ÿ@A2B0C2<10D7ÿ@.B010.< C21D07Bÿ12�ÿ�6: 5�6 62�8ÿ&6�6ÿ��1�6�ÿ&�62ÿ��6ÿ861���ÿ&18ÿ1229 2�6�� ��6ÿ26&ÿ71��68�ÿ��12�6ÿ 1�6ÿ&18ÿ79&6�52�ÿ��6ÿ 525 ÿ6� �1�592ÿ�6: 5�6 62�ÿ�9� ��98�6��5�6ÿ��685�62�8�ÿ49&ÿ1��75�12�8ÿ1�6ÿ29ÿ792�6�ÿ�6: 5�6�ÿ�9ÿ�97�ÿ1ÿ�9��9�1�6 12�ÿ�12ÿ 152�152ÿ1ÿ 525 ÿ9�ÿ1ÿ'1��679��8ÿ�6��66� %��6�6ÿ1�6ÿ��52�8ÿ&6ÿ1�6ÿ8�577ÿ29�ÿ�1���ÿ&5��*ÿ#177ÿ815��ÿ%E26ÿ��52�ÿ&6ÿ1�6ÿ�6�� �58�76186�ÿ1'9 �ÿ58ÿ��1�ÿ��6�ÿ��12�6�ÿ��6ÿ: 175�5�1�5928�* ��576ÿ1ÿ��1� 1�6ÿ�6��66ÿ58ÿ8�577ÿ��6�6��6�ÿ��6ÿ 525 ÿ: 175�5�1�592ÿ�9 7�ÿ��12�6 ��6ÿ1��75�1�592ÿ�997ÿ85�25�5�12�7�ÿ��61�52�ÿ��6ÿ�9885'575��ÿ��1�ÿ 98�ÿ9�ÿ��6ÿ�1�7�� &9 7�ÿ'6ÿ 9�6ÿ6� �1�6�ÿ��12ÿ��6ÿ��685�62�� [WWdTMGGTUYY]STeRV̀bj^ckGTWc_V]TGR_WV^`]TGHlHIGlNGHlG̀RSTUVWmRXRVYTWmUWR[mW]^[m_]TUẀTmVYmaR^UẀbm_]TcÙWVcYmUdeRW]mcYmd_]TVe]YWVRm̀T]R_^[md_c^]TTG IGF �MNMNOPQÿSTUOÿVW XYZ[\]^ÿY_Y]`[^ÿa^Ybÿcdebÿfd[\g^[ÿ]`ÿhYe\g^iÿfd[jg\^]j`Qÿ\klY^dÿj`ÿkfd[]ld`^]Ygÿ[dYfebÿkfjed[[ÿmÿn\`ÿodZ[ÿpY]gi 01231ÿ1567ÿ283ÿ9 566526��ÿ85��37ÿ2�ÿ���573�ÿ283ÿ��3�5ÿ1��3�ÿ�83ÿ1567ÿ283 ���62233ÿ�� 7ÿ126ÿ7�ÿ621ÿ7 3ÿ766�3�3ÿ5�7ÿ3�1�3ÿ283ÿ�3�ÿ��31673�2ÿ851 3573�186�ÿ3��3�63�3ÿ5�7ÿ�8�71ÿ283ÿ�6�3�162��1ÿ�5 31� ��ÿ�� 7ÿ5�266�523ÿ1��3ÿ�3��3ÿ�36��ÿ�12�5237�ÿ� 2ÿ���ÿ��2ÿ9 623ÿ1�3ÿ�35 13ÿ�3 �� 7��2ÿ����ÿ�8�ÿ2852ÿ5��65�2ÿ61ÿ�32�ÿ1�ÿ�ÿ5��2ÿ1�35�ÿ��ÿ62�ÿ01231ÿ1567� !�3ÿ283ÿ���62233ÿ�5����1ÿ7���ÿ2�ÿ28�33ÿ2�ÿ6�3ÿ6�5612ÿ5�7675231�ÿ283�ÿ�6ÿ��3 2�ÿ"258ÿ#38ÿ2�ÿ�332ÿ�628ÿ763�3�2ÿ125�38�73�1�ÿ01231ÿ1567ÿ28313ÿ125�38�73�1 �3��313�2ÿ763�3�2ÿ�3�1�326�31ÿ��ÿ5�� 1ÿ5�7ÿ5�� �7ÿ283ÿ��� �62�� �#8�13ÿ��� �1ÿ6�ÿ28�13ÿ125�38�73�ÿ��� �1ÿ�32ÿ2�ÿ185�3ÿ2836�ÿ337�5�ÿ��ÿ28�13 28�33ÿ2�ÿ6�3ÿ5�7675231�ÿ01231ÿ1567� $1ÿ283ÿ1273�2ÿ�3��313�2526�3ÿ��ÿ283ÿ135�8ÿ���62233�ÿ01231ÿ�51ÿ57�6137ÿ2�ÿ�6� %&'%(ÿ1273�21ÿ2�ÿ�3��313�2ÿ283ÿ1273�2ÿ��7�� ��ÿ�5�237ÿ2�ÿ�6�ÿ1273�21ÿ�8�ÿ�3��313�2ÿ763�3�2ÿ5�351�ÿ1�ÿ�ÿ�6�37ÿ��ÿ"#�$ 3�3 26�3ÿ� �6ÿ�35 13ÿ283�ÿ��3�133ÿ763�3�2ÿ��5�831�ÿ01231ÿ1567�ÿ�#83�ÿ� 8�13ÿ1273�2ÿ��� �1ÿ�8�ÿ��3�133ÿ5ÿ5��3ÿ� ��3�ÿ�ÿ1273�21ÿ6�ÿ763�3�2 ��5�831� �83ÿ51�ÿ�6�37ÿ5ÿ1273�2ÿ�3��313�2526�3ÿ���ÿ283ÿ)33�ÿ*�58ÿ�����5�ÿ�8�ÿ����1 �628ÿ6�12'�35�ÿ1273�21�ÿ5ÿ�3��313�2526�3ÿ���ÿ283ÿ$��51157��ÿ)����5�ÿ�8�ÿ����1 �628ÿ���1�326�3ÿ1273�21�ÿ5�7ÿ5ÿ�3��313�2526�3ÿ���ÿ283ÿ$ ��6ÿ$��51157��1� 01231ÿ1567ÿ��3ÿ283ÿ125�38�73�1ÿ�32�ÿ"�+0ÿ�� 7ÿ�6�ÿ5ÿ6�5612ÿ�8�ÿ�5�ÿ��3 1�35�ÿ52ÿ283ÿ�6�3�162�� ��ÿ5���36523ÿ3�3����3�1ÿ�5263�3ÿ��ÿ2861�ÿ#861ÿ851ÿ�33�ÿ5ÿ�3��ÿ13�1626�3ÿ853��6�� 2��6�ÿ*85�3,ÿ1567�ÿ�#83ÿ1�123�ÿ-�ÿ86�83�ÿ37 526���1.ÿ��5ÿ61ÿ2852ÿ283ÿ�3��3ÿ� "258ÿ�6��ÿ283ÿ1273�21ÿ�6�� #83ÿ�6�3�162�ÿ851ÿ3��3�63�37ÿ5ÿ���657ÿ�ÿ85��31ÿ��3�ÿ5ÿ18��2ÿ�3�6�7ÿ�ÿ26�3�ÿ� 1273�21�ÿ5 2�ÿ5�7ÿ125 ÿ85�3ÿ��3��1ÿ5�� 2ÿ283ÿ��31673�265ÿ135�8�ÿ283�ÿ5�3 3�� �5�37ÿ2�ÿ����673ÿ5������ 1ÿ/0012345ÿ28�� �8ÿ283ÿ"�+0ÿ���ÿ61237ÿ��ÿ283 6708910:;93<ÿ80374>ÿ?0289;0@ ABCDÿDFÿCGFÿFHICÿJAKBL b^^k[TNN[\``dZ[lY]giqejrN[^jf]d[NYf^]egd[NOsOPNsUNOsNgYZ[\]^tY_Y]`[^t\^Ybt^debtfd[\g^[t]`thYe\g^itfd[jg\^]j`t\klY^dtj`tkfd[]ld`^]Ygt[dYfebtkfjed[[N uNM � Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Identifier An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context UTULawsuit2024 Title A name given to the resource UTU Institutional History: Title IX Lawsuit Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource UTU Special Collections and Archives Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource 2024-2025 Description An account of the resource This collection brings together various media pertaining to the Title IX Federal lawsuit against Utah Tech University and former UTU President Richard "Biff" Williams. Included are news articles, Federal Court documents, and UTU President Shane Smeed Email Message, which in part addresses the ongoing issues and culture of the UTU campus. Those seeking more court documents can research at the Federal Court House in Salt Lake City, or by using the online case search database, <a href="https://pacer.psc.uscourts.gov/pscof/registration.jsf">PACER</a>. Format The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource application/PDF Type The nature or genre of the resource Text Language A language of the resource Eng Subject The topic of the resource Title IX Government Documents Biff Williams Rights Information about rights held in and over the resource <ol> <li>News articles are <a href="https://rightsstatements.org/page/InC-EDU/1.0/?language=en">In Copyright-Educational Use Only</a>.</li> <li>UTU Presidential email is public record.</li> <li>Federal court documents are public record.</li> </ol> Rights Holder A person or organization owning or managing rights over the resource. Sun News (news articles) St. George News (news articles) Salt Lake Tribune Is Format Of A related resource that is substantially the same as the described resource, but in another format. Born Digital Extent The size or duration of the resource. 8 MB Source A related resource from which the described resource is derived District Court of Utah PACER Court records database Email List to Employees of Utah Tech University St. George News  Salt Lake Tribune Sun News  Sun News Publisher An entity responsible for making the resource available St George News Sun News Salt Lake Tribune Utah Tech University Federal District Court for Utah Medium The material or physical carrier of the resource. Born Digital Provenance A statement of any changes in ownership and custody of the resource since its creation that are significant for its authenticity, integrity, and interpretation. The statement may include a description of any changes successive custodians made to the resource. UTU Special Collections Staff donation August 2025. Is Part Of A related resource in which the described resource is physically or logically included. Collection UA077 UTU Institutional History. Text A resource consisting primarily of words for reading. Examples include books, letters, dissertations, poems, newspapers, articles, archives of mailing lists. Note that facsimiles or images of texts are still of the genre Text. Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Identifier An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context UA077_TitleIX-09 Title A name given to the resource Lawsuit Against Utah Tech Results in Faculty Resolution, Update on Presidental Search Process Subject The topic of the resource Academic Life Faculty Senate Controversy Description An account of the resource Sun News shares part of Faculty Senate Resolution 1004, in which the senate gives a vote of "no confidence" for UTU Administration. Article gives update on UTU's search process for a new university president Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource 2025-01-20 Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Bishop, Madisyn Publisher An entity responsible for making the resource available Sun News Bibliographic Citation A bibliographic reference for the resource. Recommended practice is to include sufficient bibliographic detail to identify the resource as unambiguously as possible. Bishop, Madisyn. (2025, Jan 20). "Lawsuit against Utah Tech results in faculty resolution, update on presidential search process." Sun News, https://sunnewsdaily.com/stories/articles/2025/01/20/lawsuit-against-utah-tech-results-in-faculty-resolution-update-on-presidential-search-process/ Format The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource application/PDF Type The nature or genre of the resource Text Language A language of the resource Eng Rights Information about rights held in and over the resource IN COPYRIGHT-EDUCATIONAL USE PERMITTED Medium The material or physical carrier of the resource. Born Digital Extent The size or duration of the resource. 487 KB Is Part Of A related resource in which the described resource is physically or logically included. UA077: UTU Institutional History Source A related resource from which the described resource is derived Utah Tech University Special Collections and Archives. Server/Digital Collections/UA 077 Institutional History https://digital.library.utahtech.edu/files/original/91f34a681fabdb6dc2effad36118babf.pdf 4c1ab49b2863c056924fbc0dcbdb59e0 PDF Text Text Case 4:24-cv-00091-DN-PK Document 39 Filed 01/01/25 PageID.571 Page 1 of 4 THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF UTAH REBECCA BROADBENT, JARED RASBAND, AND HAZEL SAINSBURY, Plaintiffs, v. RICHARD “BIFF” WILLIAMS, JORDON SHARP, DEL BEATTY, MICHAEL LACOURSE, HENRIE WALTON, TIFFANY WILSON, UTAH TECH UNIVERSITY, GEOFF LANDWARD, UTAH BOARD OF HIGHER EDUCATION, UTAH SYSTEM OF HIGHER EDUCATION, THE OFFICE OF THE COMMISSIONER OF HIGHER EDUCATION, ALISON ADAMS, ERIC PEDERSEN, MATT BLACK, JYL HALL, JARED MADSEN, STACY SCHMIDT, BROOKE ULRICH, TRAVIS ROSENBERG, and COURTNEY WHITE. JOHN AND JANE DOES I-X MEMORANDUM DECISION AND ORDER GRANTING IN PART AND DENYING IN PART [34] MOTION FOR LEAVE TO FILE DOCUMENT UNDER SEAL Case No. 4:24-cv-00091-DN Judge David Nuffer Magistrate Judge Paul Kohler Defendants. Defendant Utah Tech University filed a motion 1 to file under seal its Emergency Motion 0F For Temporary Restraining Order And Injunctive Relief Against All Plaintiffs (“Emergency Motion”). Utah Tech filed a redacted version of the Emergency Motion (and its exhibits) on the public record. 2 As provided by DUCivR 5-3, Utah Tech also filed a sealed version of the 1F Emergency Motion and its exhibits. 3 The Emergency Motion seeks sweeping and immediate 2F 1 Motion for Leave to File Document Under Seal (“Motion to Seal”), docket no. 34, filed December 31, 2024. 2 Docket no. 33 (“33 Redacted Emergency Motion”), filed December 31, 2024. 3 Docket no. 35 (“35 Sealed Emergency Motion”), filed December 31, 2024. �Case 4:24-cv-00091-DN-PK Document 39 Filed 01/01/25 PageID.572 Page 2 of 4 relief “against Plaintiffs regarding their use and disclosure of Utah Tech’s privileged or confidential information.” 4 3F The Motion to Seal seeks, pending resolution of the Emergency Motion, to prevent public view of portions of Utah Tech’s Emergency Motion and parts of exhibits to that motion which include Plaintiffs’ Complaint. Specifically, Utah Tech asserts that: Those portions of the complaint [filed by Plaintiffs] which reveal confidential or privileged information, and the related identification of those portions in the [Emergency] Motion and in Exhibits 1 and 2 to the [Emergency] Motion [filed by Utah Tech] should remain sealed. Those portions which the court rules do not contain confidential or privileged information may be publicly disclosed. 5 4F Thus, Utah Tech seeks to seal information filed by Plaintiff and by Utah Tech. Utah Tech also seeks relief in two timeframes: now, pending resolution of the Emergency Motion, and long-term in the case by resolution of the Emergency Motion. This order deals only with sealing materials now, pending resolution of the Emergency Motion, and does not adjudicate or implicate the merits of the Emergency Motion. This order is a procedural device to enable the parties and the public to have appropriate information about the Emergency Motion as its substantive merits are discussed and resolved. Public performance of the judicial function is essential to the rule of law. Public access to judicial cases and disputes makes courts accountable, fosters public confidence in the courts and judicial processes, and makes clear the legal consequences of behaviors and choices. The right of public access is rooted in common law and also in the Constitution. 4 Emergency Motion at 5-6. 5 Motion to Seal at 3. The proposed order submitted by Utah Tech asks for further relief beyond restricting public access. It seeks that the 35 Sealed Emergency Motion and exhibits be “restricted to Utah Tech University and Plaintiffs.” This restriction was not addressed in the Motion to Seal but may be discussed at a forthcoming status and scheduling conference. 2 �Case 4:24-cv-00091-DN-PK Document 39 Filed 01/01/25 PageID.573 Page 3 of 4 DUCivR 5-3(a)(1) provides: The records of the court are presumptively open to the public. The sealing of pleadings, motions, memoranda, exhibits, and other documents or portions thereof (Documents) is highly discouraged. Unless restricted by statute or court order, the public will have access to all Documents filed with the court and to all court proceedings. This order deals only with the sealing of information pending resolution of Utah Tech’s Emergency Motion. At this stage, it is prudent to seal some portions of documents for temporary procedural reasons to permit full and free discussion of issues in the Emergency Motion as the long-term access to information is resolved. Therefore, the standard for decision on this Motion to Seal is more pragmatic than the standard to be used in deciding the Emergency Motion. Sealing a narrowly tailored portion of documents for a limited duration minimizes the restriction of public access. Pending resolution of the Emergency Motion, Utah Tech seeks to protect: (a) (b) (c) about two pages of information in its Emergency Motion (enumerating paragraphs it eventually seeks to protect in Plaintiffs’ Complaint); material appearing on nine pages in Utah Tech’s Exhibit 1 which is Plaintiffs’ Complaint, which adds up to about four pages of information; and a four-page text listing of information in Plaintiffs’ Complaint (Exhibit 2 to Utah Tech’s Emergency Motion) (identical to the information specified in (b)). 6 5F Unfortunately, the designations of material Utah Tech seeks to seal are reflected differently in the 33 Redacted Emergency Motion than in the 35 Sealed Emergency Motion. The redactions in the publicly filed 33 Redacted Emergency Motion are apparently a mistake and overinclusive compared to the highlights of Utah Tech’s proposed redactions in the 35 Sealed Emergency Motion. The overbroad redactions in the 33 Redacted Emergency Motion are rejected. 6 35 Sealed Emergency Motion at 19-21; Complaint (Exhibit 1 to 35 Sealed Emergency Motion) at 7-12, 17, 31-32, docket no. 35-1; Exhibit 2 to Defendants [sic] Motion [Sealed] (Exhibit 2 to 35 Sealed Emergency Motion) at 1-5, docket no. 35-2. 3 �Case 4:24-cv-00091-DN-PK Document 39 Filed 01/01/25 PageID.574 Page 4 of 4 ORDER IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the Motion to Seal 7 is GRANTED IN PART and 6F DENIED IN PART. Pending resolution of the Emergency Motion, some information will be temporarily sealed as described below, but not all the information redacted in the 33 Redacted Emergency Motion will be sealed. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED: 1. Pending resolution of the Emergency Motion, the portions of the 35 Sealed Emergency Motion and its exhibits which are highlighted in the 35 Sealed Emergency Motion and exhibits are SEALED. The 35 Sealed Emergency Motion and exhibits may remain sealed for now. 2. Utah Tech must within two business days file a CORRECTED Redacted Emergency Motion (and exhibits) with redactions to correspond with the highlighting on the 35 Sealed Emergency Motion and exhibits. This filing will improve public access to information. 3. This order has no effect on the filed version of the Plaintiffs’ Complaint. 8 That 7F decision will be made by resolution of the Emergency Motion. 4. The Sealed Motion for Leave to File Document Under Seal, docket no. 25, filed December 27, 2024, is MOOT. It is a previous version of the Motion to Seal. Signed January 1, 2025. BY THE COURT ________________________________________ David Nuffer United States District Judge 7 Docket no. 34. 8 Docket no. 2, filed November 7, 2024. 4 � Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Identifier An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context UTULawsuit2024 Title A name given to the resource UTU Institutional History: Title IX Lawsuit Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource UTU Special Collections and Archives Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource 2024-2025 Description An account of the resource This collection brings together various media pertaining to the Title IX Federal lawsuit against Utah Tech University and former UTU President Richard "Biff" Williams. Included are news articles, Federal Court documents, and UTU President Shane Smeed Email Message, which in part addresses the ongoing issues and culture of the UTU campus. Those seeking more court documents can research at the Federal Court House in Salt Lake City, or by using the online case search database, <a href="https://pacer.psc.uscourts.gov/pscof/registration.jsf">PACER</a>. Format The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource application/PDF Type The nature or genre of the resource Text Language A language of the resource Eng Subject The topic of the resource Title IX Government Documents Biff Williams Rights Information about rights held in and over the resource <ol> <li>News articles are <a href="https://rightsstatements.org/page/InC-EDU/1.0/?language=en">In Copyright-Educational Use Only</a>.</li> <li>UTU Presidential email is public record.</li> <li>Federal court documents are public record.</li> </ol> Rights Holder A person or organization owning or managing rights over the resource. Sun News (news articles) St. George News (news articles) Salt Lake Tribune Is Format Of A related resource that is substantially the same as the described resource, but in another format. Born Digital Extent The size or duration of the resource. 8 MB Source A related resource from which the described resource is derived District Court of Utah PACER Court records database Email List to Employees of Utah Tech University St. George News  Salt Lake Tribune Sun News  Sun News Publisher An entity responsible for making the resource available St George News Sun News Salt Lake Tribune Utah Tech University Federal District Court for Utah Medium The material or physical carrier of the resource. Born Digital Provenance A statement of any changes in ownership and custody of the resource since its creation that are significant for its authenticity, integrity, and interpretation. The statement may include a description of any changes successive custodians made to the resource. UTU Special Collections Staff donation August 2025. Is Part Of A related resource in which the described resource is physically or logically included. Collection UA077 UTU Institutional History. Text A resource consisting primarily of words for reading. Examples include books, letters, dissertations, poems, newspapers, articles, archives of mailing lists. Note that facsimiles or images of texts are still of the genre Text. Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Identifier An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context UA077_TitleIX-08 Title A name given to the resource Memorandum Decision and Order Granting in Part and Denying in Part [34] Motion for Leave to File Document Under Seal Subject The topic of the resource Court Records District Court of Utah Title Ix Complaint Description An account of the resource Federal District Court of Utah Judget David Nuffer decision on motions for certain parts of the Title IX lawsuit against "Biff" Williams and Utah Tech University. UTU saught to file, under seal, an Emergency Motion for Temporary Restraining Order and Injunctive Relief Against All Plaintiffs. Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource 2025-01-01 Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource U.S. District Judget David Nuffer Publisher An entity responsible for making the resource available Federal Court, District of Utah, Southern Region Bibliographic Citation A bibliographic reference for the resource. Recommended practice is to include sufficient bibliographic detail to identify the resource as unambiguously as possible. Last Name, First Name [or Entity Name]. (Date). “Title”. Collection Identifier, Box #, Folder #. Utah Tech University Special Collections & Archives, URL link. Format The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource application/PDF Type The nature or genre of the resource Text Language A language of the resource Eng Rights Information about rights held in and over the resource Public domain in the United States Medium The material or physical carrier of the resource. Born Digital Extent The size or duration of the resource. 75 KB Is Part Of A related resource in which the described resource is physically or logically included. UA077: UTU Institutional History Source A related resource from which the described resource is derived Utah Tech University Special Collections and Archives. Server/Digital Collections/UA 077 Institutional History https://digital.library.utahtech.edu/files/original/b6b390cc4000a91476020bbab13569d9.pdf 72d9217878b0b7174a53d22539c59e38 PDF Text Text �������ÿ��!ÿ"# $%&'ÿ()*'ÿ+&*,-%.ÿ/0%)1ÿ230ÿ*03+45)3*)2ÿ43ÿ,34/)614%.ÿ-)&5)61'47ÿ&845ÿ-&91,4%ÿ&--):&%4031ÿ;ÿ<)91ÿ;ÿ1%:)06:),%&'=*08 0123ÿ5673ÿ82791ÿ 16�ÿ�� ÿ7�8��6�76�ÿ��ÿ9��6���1 62�6��3��ÿ2���ÿ2��9�1ÿ2 6�21��� '%%71���999=1%:)06:),%&'=*08�3)91�,%&'>%)*'>+&*,-%.>/0%)1>30>*03+45)3*)>43>,34/)614%.>-)&5)61'47>&845>-&91,4%>&--):&%4031�&6%4*-)?@&A�@�B�>&@��>BBC B�D �0101234ÿ6789ÿ ��ÿ����ÿ������ÿ����ÿ���ÿ�����������ÿ��ÿ���������ÿ����������ÿ� ��ÿ��!���ÿ����"�����ÿ#ÿ$�!�ÿ#ÿ�"���"����%�� � ��711!!!%�"���"����%�� 1��!�1���&���&������&����&��&����������&��&���������&����������&� ��&��!���&����"�����1������'(�)0(0*0&�(66&**+ 21, �0101234ÿ6789ÿ ��ÿ����ÿ������ÿ����ÿ���ÿ�����������ÿ��ÿ���������ÿ����������ÿ� ��ÿ��!���ÿ����"�����ÿ#ÿ$�!�ÿ#ÿ�"���"����%�� � ��711!!!%�"���"����%�� 1��!�1���&���&������&����&��&����������&��&���������&����������&� ��&��!���&����"�����1������'(�)0(0*0&�(66&**+ 61, �0101234ÿ6789ÿ ��ÿ����ÿ������ÿ����ÿ���ÿ�����������ÿ��ÿ���������ÿ����������ÿ� ��ÿ��!���ÿ����"�����ÿ#ÿ$�!�ÿ#ÿ�"���"����%�� � ��711!!!%�"���"����%�� 1��!�1���&���&������&����&��&����������&��&���������&����������&� ��&��!���&����"�����1������'(�)0(0*0&�(66&**+ 91, �0101234ÿ6789ÿ ��ÿ����ÿ������ÿ����ÿ���ÿ�����������ÿ��ÿ���������ÿ����������ÿ� ��ÿ��!���ÿ����"�����ÿ#ÿ$�!�ÿ#ÿ�"���"����%�� � ��711!!!%�"���"����%�� 1��!�1���&���&������&����&��&����������&��&���������&����������&� ��&��!���&����"�����1������'(�)0(0*0&�(66&**+ 31, � Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Identifier An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context UTULawsuit2024 Title A name given to the resource UTU Institutional History: Title IX Lawsuit Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource UTU Special Collections and Archives Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource 2024-2025 Description An account of the resource This collection brings together various media pertaining to the Title IX Federal lawsuit against Utah Tech University and former UTU President Richard "Biff" Williams. Included are news articles, Federal Court documents, and UTU President Shane Smeed Email Message, which in part addresses the ongoing issues and culture of the UTU campus. Those seeking more court documents can research at the Federal Court House in Salt Lake City, or by using the online case search database, <a href="https://pacer.psc.uscourts.gov/pscof/registration.jsf">PACER</a>. Format The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource application/PDF Type The nature or genre of the resource Text Language A language of the resource Eng Subject The topic of the resource Title IX Government Documents Biff Williams Rights Information about rights held in and over the resource <ol> <li>News articles are <a href="https://rightsstatements.org/page/InC-EDU/1.0/?language=en">In Copyright-Educational Use Only</a>.</li> <li>UTU Presidential email is public record.</li> <li>Federal court documents are public record.</li> </ol> Rights Holder A person or organization owning or managing rights over the resource. Sun News (news articles) St. George News (news articles) Salt Lake Tribune Is Format Of A related resource that is substantially the same as the described resource, but in another format. Born Digital Extent The size or duration of the resource. 8 MB Source A related resource from which the described resource is derived District Court of Utah PACER Court records database Email List to Employees of Utah Tech University St. George News  Salt Lake Tribune Sun News  Sun News Publisher An entity responsible for making the resource available St George News Sun News Salt Lake Tribune Utah Tech University Federal District Court for Utah Medium The material or physical carrier of the resource. Born Digital Provenance A statement of any changes in ownership and custody of the resource since its creation that are significant for its authenticity, integrity, and interpretation. The statement may include a description of any changes successive custodians made to the resource. UTU Special Collections Staff donation August 2025. Is Part Of A related resource in which the described resource is physically or logically included. Collection UA077 UTU Institutional History. Text A resource consisting primarily of words for reading. Examples include books, letters, dissertations, poems, newspapers, articles, archives of mailing lists. Note that facsimiles or images of texts are still of the genre Text. Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Identifier An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context UA077_TitleIX-07 Title A name given to the resource Utah Tech Faculty Votes "No Confidence" in University Leadership Amid Lawsuit Allegations Subject The topic of the resource Academic Life Faculty Senate Controversy Description An account of the resource Faculty Sentate passes a resolution of "no confidence" in the UTU Administration in the wake of a federal lawsuit accusing former President "Biff" Williams, and others, of misconduct. Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource 2024-11-22 Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Kessler, Mori Publisher An entity responsible for making the resource available Sun News Bibliographic Citation A bibliographic reference for the resource. Recommended practice is to include sufficient bibliographic detail to identify the resource as unambiguously as possible. Kessler, Mori. (2024, Nov 22). "Utah Tech faculty votes 'no confidence' in university leadership amid lawsuit allegations." St. George News, https://www.stgeorgeutah.com/news/utah-tech-faculty-votes-no-confidence-in-university-leadership-amid-lawsuit-allegations/article_9a789818-a933-11ef-b0a4-aff1572cb83d.html Format The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource application/PDF Type The nature or genre of the resource Text Language A language of the resource Eng Rights Information about rights held in and over the resource IN COPYRIGHT-EDUCATIONAL USE PERMITTED Medium The material or physical carrier of the resource. Born Digital Extent The size or duration of the resource. 1.4 MB Is Part Of A related resource in which the described resource is physically or logically included. UA077: UTU Institutional History Source A related resource from which the described resource is derived Utah Tech University Special Collections and Archives. Server/Digital Collections/UA 077 Institutional History https://digital.library.utahtech.edu/files/original/ac272bae311e7ab4498d083d0a56c2d3.pdf 2a1e8f17ebb6a828b37d5de7c0394428 PDF Text Text �������ÿ��� ÿ!" #$%&ÿ'()&ÿ*%+,($-./ÿ0!ÿ1(%2-./ÿ)%*345ÿ%*-65$ÿ7./7-./ÿ1%854-$ÿ9ÿ:(85ÿ9ÿ5$/(7+/(4$%&;)7* 0123ÿ5673ÿ829 61 ÿ��ÿ�62� ÿ728���ÿ28 ��1ÿ� � �2���1 &$$35���888;5$/(7+/(4$%&;)7*�.(85�4$%&<$()&<*%+,($-./<23<1(%2-./<)%*345<%*-65$<7./7-./<1%854-$�%+$-)1(=�>6� ?�?<�@A�<>%� <%??(<�% � A�@?@6>;B C�� �0101234ÿ6728ÿ9 �ÿ����ÿ� ������ÿ�9ÿ�� ����ÿ�����ÿ����ÿ�������ÿ� ���ÿ!ÿ"� �ÿ!ÿ�������� �#��� � ��711 #�������� �#���1�� �1� �$���$� ������$��$�� ����$�����$����$�������$� ���1�����%2&�68'3'$0()6$& 28$''�$2 838)6('(�&#* 216 �0101234ÿ6728ÿ9 �ÿ����ÿ� ������ÿ�9ÿ�� ����ÿ�����ÿ����ÿ�������ÿ� ���ÿ!ÿ"� �ÿ!ÿ�������� �#��� � ��711 #�������� �#���1�� �1� �$���$� ������$��$�� ����$�����$����$�������$� ���1�����%2&�68'3'$0()6$& 28$''�$2 838)6('(�&#* 616 � Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Identifier An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context UTULawsuit2024 Title A name given to the resource UTU Institutional History: Title IX Lawsuit Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource UTU Special Collections and Archives Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource 2024-2025 Description An account of the resource This collection brings together various media pertaining to the Title IX Federal lawsuit against Utah Tech University and former UTU President Richard "Biff" Williams. Included are news articles, Federal Court documents, and UTU President Shane Smeed Email Message, which in part addresses the ongoing issues and culture of the UTU campus. Those seeking more court documents can research at the Federal Court House in Salt Lake City, or by using the online case search database, <a href="https://pacer.psc.uscourts.gov/pscof/registration.jsf">PACER</a>. Format The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource application/PDF Type The nature or genre of the resource Text Language A language of the resource Eng Subject The topic of the resource Title IX Government Documents Biff Williams Rights Information about rights held in and over the resource <ol> <li>News articles are <a href="https://rightsstatements.org/page/InC-EDU/1.0/?language=en">In Copyright-Educational Use Only</a>.</li> <li>UTU Presidential email is public record.</li> <li>Federal court documents are public record.</li> </ol> Rights Holder A person or organization owning or managing rights over the resource. Sun News (news articles) St. George News (news articles) Salt Lake Tribune Is Format Of A related resource that is substantially the same as the described resource, but in another format. Born Digital Extent The size or duration of the resource. 8 MB Source A related resource from which the described resource is derived District Court of Utah PACER Court records database Email List to Employees of Utah Tech University St. George News  Salt Lake Tribune Sun News  Sun News Publisher An entity responsible for making the resource available St George News Sun News Salt Lake Tribune Utah Tech University Federal District Court for Utah Medium The material or physical carrier of the resource. Born Digital Provenance A statement of any changes in ownership and custody of the resource since its creation that are significant for its authenticity, integrity, and interpretation. The statement may include a description of any changes successive custodians made to the resource. UTU Special Collections Staff donation August 2025. Is Part Of A related resource in which the described resource is physically or logically included. Collection UA077 UTU Institutional History. Text A resource consisting primarily of words for reading. Examples include books, letters, dissertations, poems, newspapers, articles, archives of mailing lists. Note that facsimiles or images of texts are still of the genre Text. Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Identifier An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context UA077_TitleIX-11 Title A name given to the resource Utah Tech Marketing VP Leaving Campus Amidst Ongoing Lawsuit Subject The topic of the resource Academic Life Marketing Controversy Description An account of the resource Utah Tech University's Marketing and Communication Vice President Jordon Sharp, announced his resignation after fourteen years. Lawsuit claims he created a toxic work environment and posted inappropriate sticky notes in breakroom. Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource 2025-08-05 Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Fiala, Nick Publisher An entity responsible for making the resource available St. George News Bibliographic Citation A bibliographic reference for the resource. Recommended practice is to include sufficient bibliographic detail to identify the resource as unambiguously as possible. Fiala, Nick. (2025, Aug 5). "Utah Tech marketing VP leaving campus amidst ongoin lawsuit." St. George News, https://www.stgeorgeutah.com/news/utah-tech-marketing-vp-leaving-campus-amidst-ongoing-lawsuit/article_24d30b5b-8f63-4a20-abbe-2a05063fbfd4.html Format The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource application/PDF Type The nature or genre of the resource Text Language A language of the resource Eng Rights Information about rights held in and over the resource IN COPYRIGHT-EDUCATIONAL USE PERMITTED Medium The material or physical carrier of the resource. Born Digital Extent The size or duration of the resource. 746 KB Is Part Of A related resource in which the described resource is physically or logically included. UA077: UTU Institutional History Source A related resource from which the described resource is derived Utah Tech University Special Collections and Archives. Server/Digital Collections/UA 077 Institutional History https://digital.library.utahtech.edu/files/original/2d1af0a27d31a1f862ce836ac4ac107a.pdf 37d6cba39a663c1ddbf8b0db34fec102 PDF Text Text Utah Tech University Faculty Senate Resolution Subject: Resolution of No Confidence and Requested Action Plan Resolution Number: 1004 Date Introduced: November 19, 2024 Introduced By: Julie Chew, President and Glenn Webb, Past President We, the Faculty Senate of Utah Tech University, express our profound concern regarding recent allegations of misconduct involving former President Richard "Biff" Williams and the administrative handling of these matters by the current university administrators. The federal lawsuit brought by Rebecca Broadbent, Jared Rasband, and Hazel Sainsbury describes a culture of harassment, discrimination, and retaliation that is antithetical to the core values of this institution. The specific allegations include: • Inappropriate actions by the former president, such as an incident involving suggestive and degrading materials attributed falsely to university employees without their knowledge or consent. • Intimidation, defamation, and professional retaliation against staff who filed Title IX and Title VII complaints, creating a hostile work environment and undermining trust in the university’s grievance processes. • A failure to conduct fair and transparent investigations into these allegations, raising serious questions about the integrity of the administration and its commitment to accountability. As representatives of the faculty, we believe these issues strike at the heart of our university's mission to foster an educational environment based on belonging, equitability, and respect. The alleged handling of these matters reflects failures (a) to uphold these principles and (b) to prioritize the success and well-being of our academic community. Additionally, the allegations are serious enough such that: • Faculty and students—as reported in the Sun News—have called into question the individuals’ ethical judgement, leadership ability, and suitability for their roles at Utah Tech University; • Faculty and students have raised serious concerns of compromising the integrity and reputation of Utah Tech University; • The former president, Richard “Biff” Williams, has publicly admitted to and apologized for various allegations in the lawsuit toward his new institution, but not Utah Tech University; The processes alleged in the lawsuit have violated federal, USHE, and Utah Tech University policies for handling such issues of misconduct. Considering these concerns, we, the Faculty Senate as representatives of Utah Tech University’s faculty body, and in solidarity with our Utah Tech University student body, express our lack of confidence in the current administrative processes and leadership. We call for immediate decisive action to restore trust and integrity at Utah Tech University. On November 20, 2024, the Faculty Senate and the general faculty will meet at noon and anticipate a call for the following actions: 1. A full, independent review of the allegations and the university’s response to ensure accountability and transparency and that those named in the lawsuit not be allowed to select the independent body for this review. 2. Immediate steps to strengthen protections for whistleblowers and all individuals engaging in protected activities under Title IX and Title VII including mediation and support for Jared Rasband, Hazel Sainsbury, and Rebecca Broadbent—if she chooses to return. 3. A publicly shared, detailed plan addressing recommitment to fostering a workplace culture grounded in respect, equity, and shared governance among administration, faculty, and students. �4. An acknowledgement and apology issued by Interim President Courtney White for these circumstances that (a) negatively affect students, faculty, and staff, (b) result in diversion of time and resources, impacting the regular functions of job duties especially those of the Office of General Council, and (c) caused harm to the good name and reputation of Utah Tech University. 5. A vote of no confidence in the following administrative individuals with executive duties in leadership positions at Utah Tech University: Interim President Courtney White, Provost Michael Lacourse, Vice President of Student Affairs Del Beatty, Vice President of Marketing and Communication Jordon Sharp, Assistant to the President for Government and Community Relations and Interim Chief of Staff Henrie Walton, and Executive Director of Human Resources Travis Rosenberg. � Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Identifier An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context UTULawsuit2024 Title A name given to the resource UTU Institutional History: Title IX Lawsuit Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource UTU Special Collections and Archives Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource 2024-2025 Description An account of the resource This collection brings together various media pertaining to the Title IX Federal lawsuit against Utah Tech University and former UTU President Richard "Biff" Williams. Included are news articles, Federal Court documents, and UTU President Shane Smeed Email Message, which in part addresses the ongoing issues and culture of the UTU campus. Those seeking more court documents can research at the Federal Court House in Salt Lake City, or by using the online case search database, <a href="https://pacer.psc.uscourts.gov/pscof/registration.jsf">PACER</a>. Format The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource application/PDF Type The nature or genre of the resource Text Language A language of the resource Eng Subject The topic of the resource Title IX Government Documents Biff Williams Rights Information about rights held in and over the resource <ol> <li>News articles are <a href="https://rightsstatements.org/page/InC-EDU/1.0/?language=en">In Copyright-Educational Use Only</a>.</li> <li>UTU Presidential email is public record.</li> <li>Federal court documents are public record.</li> </ol> Rights Holder A person or organization owning or managing rights over the resource. Sun News (news articles) St. George News (news articles) Salt Lake Tribune Is Format Of A related resource that is substantially the same as the described resource, but in another format. Born Digital Extent The size or duration of the resource. 8 MB Source A related resource from which the described resource is derived District Court of Utah PACER Court records database Email List to Employees of Utah Tech University St. George News  Salt Lake Tribune Sun News  Sun News Publisher An entity responsible for making the resource available St George News Sun News Salt Lake Tribune Utah Tech University Federal District Court for Utah Medium The material or physical carrier of the resource. Born Digital Provenance A statement of any changes in ownership and custody of the resource since its creation that are significant for its authenticity, integrity, and interpretation. The statement may include a description of any changes successive custodians made to the resource. UTU Special Collections Staff donation August 2025. Is Part Of A related resource in which the described resource is physically or logically included. Collection UA077 UTU Institutional History. Text A resource consisting primarily of words for reading. Examples include books, letters, dissertations, poems, newspapers, articles, archives of mailing lists. Note that facsimiles or images of texts are still of the genre Text. Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Identifier An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context UA077_TitleIX-06 Title A name given to the resource Utah Tech University Faculty Senate Resolution 1004 Subject The topic of the resource Academic Life Faculty Senate Controversy Description An account of the resource FS Resolution 1004 in which the faculty senate outlines its greviences and demands, and chooses a vote of "no confidence" in the current UTU Admininstratoon. Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource 2024-11-19 Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Chew, Julie Webb, Glenn Publisher An entity responsible for making the resource available Utah Tech University Faculty Senate Bibliographic Citation A bibliographic reference for the resource. Recommended practice is to include sufficient bibliographic detail to identify the resource as unambiguously as possible. Last Name, First Name [or Entity Name]. (Date). “Title”. Collection Identifier, Box #, Folder #. Utah Tech University Special Collections & Archives, URL link. Format The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource application/PDF Type The nature or genre of the resource Text Language A language of the resource Eng Rights Information about rights held in and over the resource Public domain in the United States Medium The material or physical carrier of the resource. Born Digital Extent The size or duration of the resource. 149 KB Is Part Of A related resource in which the described resource is physically or logically included. UA077: UTU Institutional History Source A related resource from which the described resource is derived Utah Tech University Special Collections and Archives. Server/Digital Collections/UA 077 Institutional History https://digital.library.utahtech.edu/files/original/66c3c6520e137ea7814a5b0fcf0fb44f.pdf f6d84197d46cca433530076a7d34fb9f PDF Text Text •–•–—˜™ÿ›œžÿŸ ¡”¢£ÿ¤’¥£ÿ¡“¦§’¨©¦”ªÿ«¨§©”ÿ«¬¢¥’­ÿ“ÿ¬’¢§’ÿ®¨ÿ̄“°“±“ÿ̈’¢©“© 012034526 789ÿ 012034526 ���ÿ������������ÿ���ÿ��������ÿ� ����ÿ�!����ÿ�� !���� "#$%&'($)*ÿ,--$.$/0(ÿ/'&ÿ()/*$#1ÿ($0&#)ÿ,#ÿ)2&ÿ'&/(,#(ÿ-,'ÿ)2&ÿ/.)$,#3 4567ÿ96:;<==ÿ>ÿ?@<ABCDÿ=EÿFG<ÿF:BH6I<JÿK:<LMÿBIM=CDDÿCÿNO=CGÿF<AGPÿMBQIÿEIÿ=G<ÿ<CM=ÿMB7<ÿERÿS:<C=<:ÿTBEIÿ?=C7B6UÿBIÿVWVVX YZÿ ÿ\]^_ÿ̀aabcdefcÿgÿhiejÿklÿmnmolÿpqnnÿ]jrj ‘‘’“” stuÿwxyz{xÿ|ÿ}e]~ÿ€i~ÿ}cb€^‚beZƒ‚ÿi~b€„ÿ]i]a€rbiÿf„„bi€^ÿ]caÿ]ÿi]caba]e€ÿefÿ€ifr€ e~€ÿ€a†i]ebfc]‡ÿbc‚ebe†ebfcƒ‚ÿc€ˆeÿ‰^€‚ba€ceÿ~]‚ÿ€€cÿ‰‡]i€aÿfcÿ‡€]€ÿ„f^ÿ‚€€^]‡ÿrfce~‚j \bi~]€‡ÿŠ]if†^‚€lÿe~€ÿ†cb€^‚beZƒ‚ÿ‰^ff‚eÿ]caÿbi€ÿ‰^€‚ba€ceÿf„ÿ]i]a€rbiÿ]„„]b^‚lÿ~]‚ €€cÿ‰‡]i€aÿfcÿ‡€]€ÿ†ceb‡ÿ‹]c†]^ZÿmnmŒjÿ~^b‚ÿŽ†Zr]clÿ}e]~ÿ€i~ƒ‚ÿi†^^€ceÿ]‚‚fib]e€ £””«©œ––±±±²©¬”¨¦³²¥‘–“’±©–—´—µ–´–´›–¯”¢£¶”’¥£¶¯“¦§’¨©¦”ª¶«¨§©”– – �˜™˜™š›œÿžŸ ÿ¡¢ £hŽkÿjd¤kÿ£Šl¥dgmlh‹ÿegf¥fmhÿeŽ¤doÿfŠÿdŽ¥dÿ¦fgÿŒŠ§Šf¨ŠÿgdŽmfŠm 0123245ÿ721ÿ898 9ÿ012�18 4ÿ8� ÿ201852�4�ÿ�84ÿ� �ÿ8002�5 ÿ52ÿ413ÿ84ÿ�51 0123245ÿ��5�ÿ�892�14�4ÿ�095 ÿ15�1��ÿ��3145�ÿ27798�4ÿ92�71 � ��� ÿ��3145�ÿ�84ÿ31�ÿ92�7 �9ÿ5�85ÿ5� ÿ�342�ÿ27ÿ�98 9ÿ�77814ÿ8� ÿ2�1 45� �54ÿ���ÿ�ÿ� ��ÿ4�00215 ÿ5�12���ÿ5� ÿ� ÿ27ÿ5� ÿ�81��ÿ��3145�ÿ402 40142� !��ÿ"8��ÿ52�ÿ�� ÿ#8�5ÿ�8 ÿ�1��� ÿ�ÿ8�ÿ 8�� cdefghÿjklmÿno $�3145�ÿ27798�4ÿ 9�� ÿ52ÿ92 �5ÿ7�15� 1ÿ2�ÿ���ÿ�892�14ÿ�84ÿ� �ÿ0�89 ÿ2� �83ÿ8� ÿ7ÿ� ÿ4ÿ� ��ÿ08 ÿ�1��ÿ�4ÿ8�4�9�ÿ�892�14ÿ92��ÿ�25ÿ�ÿ189� ÿ721 92 �5� %&'()*+',ÿ./ÿ012ÿ4516789ÿ:,;(<,==,* >?@ÿ@B?ÿCD@?E@ÿF?GEÿHIÿEJHEKLMHMFNÿ@OÿOJLÿPQRÿTUQVWXY F?GEC?@@?LZÿ[F@?LÿIOJLÿ?\DMCÿH?COGÿ@OÿL?K?M]?ÿ\OL?ÿE@OLM?E CM^?ÿ@B?E?ÿLMNB@ÿ@OÿIOJLÿMFHO_Z wxyÿ{|}ÿ~ÿ|€|} ‰Šhdgÿ‹fŒgÿdŽl pqrsturvs tp‚ƒ„ ÿ†ÿuqp‡ˆ ‘’“”•–’— `2�15� �ÿa�5�ÿ5� ÿ��3145��4ÿ�51 ÿ014 �5�ÿ4�5ÿ8�ÿ 8�ÿ52ÿ49�22�ÿ27798�4ÿ�845 a � 48��ÿ�721ÿ�4ÿ 942�ÿ52ÿ8002�5ÿb�� 8�ÿ84ÿ�51 ÿ0123245� khhemž™™¨¨¨©mhglª©¤f™Šd¨m™š«š¬™Ÿ«™«™ŒhŽk­hd¤k­ŒŠl¥dgmlh‹­egf¥fmh™ š™ŸŸ �†‡†‡ˆ‰ŠÿŒŽÿ‘ ’“”•ÿ–—˜•ÿ’™š›—œš“žÿŸœ›“ÿŸ¡”˜—¢ÿ™ÿ¡—”›—ÿ£œÿ¤™¥™ ¦™ÿœ—”™ 01ÿ34567ÿ6859ÿ 45 ÿ6ÿ5�4 ÿ��ÿ68�6ÿ�4�96ÿ�5�8�7�ÿ����497ÿ8�9ÿ�77 ÿ����7�ÿ �7��7ÿ� 65�ÿ�� ��4�ÿ�����ÿ!8567ÿ5�4 7�ÿ���7��79ÿ5ÿ687ÿ7 �5�"ÿ01ÿ35��ÿ�7ÿ�59565 3568ÿ#���7 5�ÿ#���549ÿ�749 7�ÿ�9ÿ37��ÿ�9ÿ�����6�ÿ�7��74985�ÿ6ÿ9�5�56ÿ�77����$ÿ� � 47� 7 ��65 9ÿ�4ÿ� ÿ56745 ÿ�4�96ÿ��45 ÿ68�6ÿ65 7ÿ�745�"ÿ��ÿ��� ÿ59ÿ6ÿ �$7ÿ� �7�595 ÿ�9ÿ9 ÿ�9ÿ� 995��7" %&'ÿ)*+ÿ,'*-.&/ÿ0&1/2&''&-3ÿ456ÿ89:;<ÿ=>??6<@ÿ<@AB>6<ÿ6C6B:ÿDABE>E?F 86G>C6B68ÿB>?5@ÿ@Aÿ:AHBÿ>E=AIJ KLMNOÿQÿRQSTUÿNVQTS }~€ÿ‚ƒ €„ W 68ÿ!8567ÿ� �ÿ����497ÿ�47ÿ� ÿ687ÿ�� �5��679ÿ687ÿX6�8ÿW �4�ÿ�ÿY5874 Z����65 ÿ59ÿ� 95�745 ÿ5ÿ569ÿ 5 ÿ97�4�8ÿ6ÿ�5�ÿ�ÿ47����7 7 6ÿ�4ÿ�4 74ÿX6�8 [7�8ÿ�4795�7 6ÿ\]^_`abÿde]ffgÿh]ii]`jk�ÿ38 ÿklmnnmbÿbopqÿìklÿr`qs`atÿloÿnsaksmÿol_ma onnoalsq]l]mk�ÿ���4�5 ÿ6ÿ�ÿ� 5�74956�ÿ��5�5��ÿ38 ÿ�9$7�ÿ 6ÿ�7ÿ5�7 65�57�ÿ�7���97ÿ687 9�4�7ÿ3�9ÿ 6ÿ��68 45u7�ÿ6ÿ9�7�$ÿ ÿ687ÿ �6674" X6�8ÿv�967 ÿ�ÿY5874ÿZ����65 ÿ��5�5��9ÿ8��7ÿ�7��57�ÿ6ÿ� 7 6ÿ ÿ� �ÿ�� �5��679" W7�47ÿ859ÿ97�7�65 ÿ�9ÿ56745 ÿ�4795�7 6�ÿ!8567ÿ974�7�ÿ�9ÿ�4795�7 6ÿ�ÿX6�8ÿ[7�8w9 7x7��65�7ÿ����549�ÿ!5��5� 9wÿ�857�ÿ�ÿ96���ÿ� �ÿ97�476�4�ÿ6ÿ687ÿ� 5�74956�w9ÿ� �4�ÿ� 64�96779"ÿW7�47ÿ� 5 ÿ6ÿX6�8ÿ[7�8ÿ5ÿ��y��ÿ87ÿ974�7�ÿ�9ÿ�ÿ����596ÿ�4ÿ687ÿX 5�74956� �ÿz47 ÿ� �ÿ5ÿ�ÿ95 5��4ÿ�����56�ÿ3568ÿ687ÿX6�8ÿZ����65 ÿ#99�5�65 "ÿY59 �4�7995 ��ÿ7x�7457 �7ÿ��9ÿ5����79ÿ3 4$ÿ3568ÿ687ÿ{7�����ÿz47 ÿ� �ÿX6�8ÿ9�967 9 �ÿ85874ÿ7����65 �ÿ687ÿ��6674ÿ�9ÿ�99596� 6ÿ� 5995 74ÿ�74ÿ��� 5 ÿ� �ÿ� �5��" !8567ÿ8 ��9ÿ� ÿ�99�5�67ÿ�7477ÿ�4 ÿv 3ÿ| ��77�ÿ�ÿ���87�4w9ÿ�7477ÿ�4 ÿX6�8ÿv6�67 X 5�74956��ÿ�ÿ �9674w9ÿ�7477ÿ�4 ÿ687ÿX 5�74956�ÿ�ÿX6�8ÿ� �ÿ�ÿ��3ÿ�7477ÿ�4 ÿ687 X 5�74956�ÿ�ÿz47 " •““Ÿ‡‡¦¦¦§¡“œš¨§˜©‡™—¦‡ˆªˆ«‡Žª‡ªŒ‡¤“”•¬“—˜•¬¤™š›—œš“ž¬Ÿœ›“‡ Œ‡ŽŽ �Z[Z[\]^ÿ_àbÿcd eRfUÿTNgUÿehViNQWVRjÿOQPiPWRÿOkfgNYÿPhÿkNfiNÿlPQÿmhnhPohÿQNfWPhW MNOPQRÿTUVWÿXY 01234567ÿ916ÿ6757ÿ ÿ96ÿ�5767 �ÿ�36�3 ÿ6 27ÿ�7��ÿ��ÿ�����ÿ375677 �ÿ�97 4 756���6ÿ121 7� 2ÿ�53�51�6�ÿ�35� �ÿ2�367��ÿ��9ÿ71 6ÿ1 ÿ�53�3� �ÿ�7129 � �91�ÿ��1276ÿ�357ÿ7��9166ÿ3 ÿ1ÿ�71575�27 �757ÿ1��53129ÿ�3ÿ7421�3 �ÿ6ÿ1ÿ5764��� !�19ÿ"729�6ÿ�315ÿ3#ÿ�546�776ÿ5727 ���ÿ93 357ÿ�97ÿ�5336�ÿ��9ÿ�6ÿ$%27��7 27ÿ ÿ&75 27 �15� '7#357ÿ23� �ÿ�3ÿ!�19ÿ"729�ÿ01234567ÿ6757ÿ16ÿ71 ÿ1�ÿ&1�ÿ(346�3 ÿ&�1�7ÿ! 756�� ÿ"7%16ÿ1 ÿ1�ÿ)1�3 1�ÿ! 756��ÿ ÿ*1�#35 1�ÿ(7ÿ916ÿ1ÿ�1297�35�6ÿ7�577ÿ#53� &�5 �#7�ÿ*3��7�7ÿ ÿ+166129467��6�ÿ1 ÿ1ÿ�16�75�6ÿ1 ÿ��3ÿ32�351�76ÿ#53�ÿ, 1 1 ! 756��� -./0ÿ23.ÿ245678.ÿ4.094:ÿ:3.ÿ;:945.;ÿ9:3.4;ÿ<=8>:? 94ÿ@98>:A �35ÿ375ÿ�B�ÿ�7156�ÿ"97ÿ&1��ÿ01�7ÿ"5�4 7ÿ916ÿ�77 ÿ!�19�6ÿ 7�7 7 �ÿ7�6ÿ634527� C45ÿ57�35�756ÿ�35�ÿ�57�766��ÿ�3ÿ4 2375ÿ�97ÿ6�3576ÿ�91�ÿ�1��75ÿ�36�ÿ�3ÿ!�19 6�ÿ#53� 4 517� �ÿ�97ÿ23���7%�76ÿ3#ÿ2345�ÿ54� �6ÿ�3ÿ1��3� �ÿ�1%ÿ�1�756ÿ�3ÿ677ÿ�9757ÿ1 93�ÿ�975ÿ915ÿ7157ÿ3��156ÿ157ÿ�7 �ÿ6�7 ��ÿ235;ÿ<45:5<=/ÿ@94Dÿ@97/E8>:ÿ6. 09;;56/.ÿ@5:397:ÿ0.90/.ÿ/5D.ÿF97?58E5G5E7=/;ÿ@39ÿ78E.4;:=8Eÿ:3. 5H094:=8<.ÿ9Iÿ/9<=/Jÿ58E.0.8E.8:ÿK9748=/5;HAÿÿ6ÿ1ÿ3 �53#�ÿ7�6533��ÿ775� 64�625��3 ÿ1 ÿ775�ÿ3 1�3 ÿ#47�6ÿ345ÿ� 663 �ÿ64��35� �ÿ�97ÿ �7��9ÿ57�35� � �91�ÿ69 76ÿ1ÿ��9�ÿ3 ÿ�97ÿ6ÿ6476ÿ691� �ÿ!�19ÿ�3 1�� L34ÿ21 ÿ97��ÿ�3�75ÿ�96ÿ�35�� URROW`[[ooopWkRQVqpgPr[hNoW[\s\t[as[s_[mRfUuRNgUumhViNQWVRjuOQPiPWR[ t[aa � Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Identifier An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context UTULawsuit2024 Title A name given to the resource UTU Institutional History: Title IX Lawsuit Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource UTU Special Collections and Archives Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource 2024-2025 Description An account of the resource This collection brings together various media pertaining to the Title IX Federal lawsuit against Utah Tech University and former UTU President Richard "Biff" Williams. Included are news articles, Federal Court documents, and UTU President Shane Smeed Email Message, which in part addresses the ongoing issues and culture of the UTU campus. Those seeking more court documents can research at the Federal Court House in Salt Lake City, or by using the online case search database, <a href="https://pacer.psc.uscourts.gov/pscof/registration.jsf">PACER</a>. Format The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource application/PDF Type The nature or genre of the resource Text Language A language of the resource Eng Subject The topic of the resource Title IX Government Documents Biff Williams Rights Information about rights held in and over the resource <ol> <li>News articles are <a href="https://rightsstatements.org/page/InC-EDU/1.0/?language=en">In Copyright-Educational Use Only</a>.</li> <li>UTU Presidential email is public record.</li> <li>Federal court documents are public record.</li> </ol> Rights Holder A person or organization owning or managing rights over the resource. Sun News (news articles) St. George News (news articles) Salt Lake Tribune Is Format Of A related resource that is substantially the same as the described resource, but in another format. Born Digital Extent The size or duration of the resource. 8 MB Source A related resource from which the described resource is derived District Court of Utah PACER Court records database Email List to Employees of Utah Tech University St. George News  Salt Lake Tribune Sun News  Sun News Publisher An entity responsible for making the resource available St George News Sun News Salt Lake Tribune Utah Tech University Federal District Court for Utah Medium The material or physical carrier of the resource. Born Digital Provenance A statement of any changes in ownership and custody of the resource since its creation that are significant for its authenticity, integrity, and interpretation. The statement may include a description of any changes successive custodians made to the resource. UTU Special Collections Staff donation August 2025. Is Part Of A related resource in which the described resource is physically or logically included. Collection UA077 UTU Institutional History. Text A resource consisting primarily of words for reading. Examples include books, letters, dissertations, poems, newspapers, articles, archives of mailing lists. Note that facsimiles or images of texts are still of the genre Text. Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Identifier An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context UA077_TitleIX-01 Title A name given to the resource Utah University's Top Academic Officer Place on Leave Subject The topic of the resource Academic Life Chief Academic Officer Controversy Description An account of the resource UTU Chief Academic Officer, Michael Lacourse, placed on leave for several months. Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource 2024-10-03 Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Burkett, Jud Publisher An entity responsible for making the resource available Salt Lake Tribune Bibliographic Citation A bibliographic reference for the resource. Recommended practice is to include sufficient bibliographic detail to identify the resource as unambiguously as possible. Burkett, Jud. (2024, Oct 3). "Utah university's top academic officer placed on leave." Salt Lake Tribune, https://www.sltrib.com/news/2024/10/03/utah-tech-university-provost/ Format The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource application/PDF Type The nature or genre of the resource Text Language A language of the resource Eng Rights Information about rights held in and over the resource IN COPYRIGHT-EDUCATIONAL USE PERMITTED Medium The material or physical carrier of the resource. Born Digital Extent The size or duration of the resource. 531 KB Is Part Of A related resource in which the described resource is physically or logically included. UA077: UTU Institutional History Source A related resource from which the described resource is derived Utah Tech University Special Collections and Archives. Server/Digital Collections/UA 077 Institutional History