§

[Redacted], Karen L., 1 Complainant, v. John P. Roth, Acting Secretary, Department of the Air Force, Agency.

Appeal No. 2020000655 (E.E.O.C. Feb. 3, 2021)
[Redacted], Karen L., 1 Complainant, v. John P. Roth, Acting Secretary, Department of the Air Force, Agency.

18 Cited authorities

  1. Celotex Corp. v. Catrett

    477 U.S. 317 (1986)   Cited 217,235 times   40 Legal Analyses
    Holding that a movant's summary judgment motion should be granted "against a [nonmovant] who fails to make a showing sufficient to establish the existence of an element essential to that party's case, and on which that party will bear the burden of proof at trial"

  2. Reeves v. Sanderson Plumbing Prods., Inc.

    530 U.S. 133 (2000)   Cited 21,201 times   22 Legal Analyses
    Holding that, since the 58-year-old plaintiff was fired by his 60-year-old employer, there was an inference that "age discrimination was not the motive"

  3. McDonnell Douglas Corp. v. Green

    411 U.S. 792 (1973)   Cited 52,440 times   95 Legal Analyses
    Holding in employment discrimination case that statistical evidence of employer's general policy and practice may be relevant circumstantial evidence of discriminatory intent behind individual employment decision

  4. Harris v. Forklift Sys., Inc.

    510 U.S. 17 (1993)   Cited 12,396 times   23 Legal Analyses
    Holding that "no single factor is required" to show a hostile work environment, including "whether [the acts are] physically threatening"

  5. St. Mary's Honor Ctr. v. Hicks

    509 U.S. 502 (1993)   Cited 12,287 times   8 Legal Analyses
    Holding that a trier of fact may infer discrimination upon rejecting an employer's proffered reason for termination

  6. Tex. Dept. of Cmty. Affairs v. Burdine

    450 U.S. 248 (1981)   Cited 20,012 times   9 Legal Analyses
    Holding in the Title VII context that the plaintiff's prima facie case creates "a legally mandatory, rebuttable presumption" that shifts the burden of proof to the employer, and "if the employer is silent in the face of the presumption, the court must enter judgment for the plaintiff"

  7. U.S. Postal Service Bd. of Govs. v. Aikens

    460 U.S. 711 (1983)   Cited 2,407 times   5 Legal Analyses
    Holding that because "[t]here will seldom be `eyewitness' testimony to the employer's mental process," evidence of the employer's discriminatory attitude in general is relevant and admissible to prove discrimination

  8. Furnco Construction Corp. v. Waters

    438 U.S. 567 (1978)   Cited 2,165 times   4 Legal Analyses
    Holding that a district court was "entitled to consider the racial mix of the work force when trying to make the determination as to motivation" in the employment discrimination context

  9. Henson v. City of Dundee

    682 F.2d 897 (11th Cir. 1982)   Cited 977 times   1 Legal Analyses
    Holding that where a supervisor makes sexual overtures to employees of both genders, or where the conduct is equally offensive to male and female workers, the conduct may be actionable under state law, but it is not actionable as harassment under Title VII because men and women are accorded like treatment

  10. Oliver v. Digital Equipment Corp.

    846 F.2d 103 (1st Cir. 1988)   Cited 413 times
    Holding that discharge over two and one half years after employee filed EEOC complaint was insufficient showing of retaliation to avoid summary judgment for employer

  11. Section 2000e - Definitions

    42 U.S.C. § 2000e   Cited 51,702 times   129 Legal Analyses
    Granting EEOC authority to issue procedural regulations to carry out Title VII provisions

  12. Section 791 - Employment of individuals with disabilities

    29 U.S.C. § 791   Cited 2,276 times   6 Legal Analyses
    Adopting standards for ADA claims under § 501 of the Rehabilitation Act, including 42 U.S.C. § 12112, which forbids discrimination "against a qualified individual with a disability because of the disability . . ."

  13. Section 1614.604 - Filing and computation of time

    29 C.F.R. § 1614.604   Cited 137 times   1 Legal Analyses
    Providing the time limits applicable to the subject regulations "are subject to waiver, estoppel and equitable tolling"

  14. Section 1614.109 - Hearings

    29 C.F.R. § 1614.109   Cited 133 times   2 Legal Analyses
    Governing administrative hearings

  15. Section 1614.405 - Decisions on appeals

    29 C.F.R. § 1614.405   Cited 81 times   3 Legal Analyses
    Providing that " decision [of the EEOC in an administrative appeal] is final . . . unless . . . [e]ither party files a timely request for reconsideration"

  16. Section 1614.403 - How to appeal

    29 C.F.R. § 1614.403   Cited 34 times
    Indicating that failure to file timely appeal requires dismissal by EEOC

  17. Section 1635.3 - Definitions specific to GINA

    29 C.F.R. § 1635.3   Cited 28 times   21 Legal Analyses

    (a)Family member means with respect to any individual: (1) A person who is a dependent of that individual as the result of marriage, birth, adoption, or placement for adoption; or (2) A first-degree, second-degree, third-degree, or fourth-degree relative of the individual, or of a dependent of the individual as defined in § 1635.3(a)(1) . (i) First-degree relatives include an individual's parents, siblings, and children. (ii) Second-degree relatives include an individual's grandparents, grandchildren

  18. Section 1635.1 - Purpose

    29 C.F.R. § 1635.1   1 Legal Analyses

    (a) The purpose of this part is to implement Title II of the Genetic Information Nondiscrimination Act of 2008, 42 U.S.C. 2000ff , et seq. Title II of GINA: (1) Prohibits use of genetic information in employment decision-making; (2) Restricts employers and other entities subject to Title II of GINA from requesting, requiring, or purchasing genetic information; (3) Requires that genetic information be maintained as a confidential medical record, and places strict limits on disclosure of genetic information;