Summary
The United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit affirmed summary judgment for the State Department in Susan Qashu’s Rehabilitation Act claims. The court held that the Department provided reasonable accommodations, offered legitimate nondiscriminatory reasons for rescinding her fellowship renewal and not assigning her an ocean-acidification portfolio, and did not retaliate against her.
Topics
Practice areas
Questions Presented
- Whether the State Department denied Qashu a reasonable accommodation in violation of the Rehabilitation Act.
- Whether the State Department discriminated against Qashu because of her disability by rescinding her fellowship renewal offer or failing to assign her the ocean-acidification portfolio.
- Whether the State Department retaliated against Qashu for requesting an accommodation or filing an administrative discrimination complaint.
- Whether summary judgment was proper on Qashu's Rehabilitation Act claims.
Holdings
- The State Department did not deny Qashu a reasonable accommodation because it provided reasonable accommodations, moved her to a quiet office, provided readers when available, worked to resolve her computer and adaptive-software problems, and did not end the interactive process or participate in it in bad faith.
- Qashu did not establish disability discrimination because the State Department offered legitimate, nondiscriminatory reasons for rescinding the fellowship renewal offer and not assigning her the ocean-acidification portfolio, and no reasonable jury could find those reasons pretextual.
- Qashu did not establish retaliation because she failed to show that the State Department's decisions were caused by protected activity or that its legitimate reasons were pretextual.
Key quotations
“The “interactive process” is the “back-and-forth between employer and employee” that should result in enough information for the employer to “‘determine the appropriate reasonable accommodation.’”” (at 7)
“But disability law requires reasonable, not perfect, accommodations.” (at 9)
“We affirm the district court’s decision.” (at 13)
Factual background
Qashu, who is visually impaired, served as an American Association for the Advancement of Science fellow at the State Department beginning in February 2016 and received screen-reading software, noise-cancelling headphones, and other accommodations. She complained that some accommodations were inadequate or delayed, but in September 2016 she praised the Disability and Reasonable Accommodation Division for accommodating her completely and beautifully. The State Department later rescinded an offer to renew her fellowship after Qashu did not return revised renewal paperwork, and it did not select her to lead an ocean-acidification portfolio after she did not recommend herself for the role. Qashu subsequently sued, alleging that these and other events violated the Rehabilitation Act.
Procedural history
Qashu sued the State Department more than five years after her fellowship ended, alleging disability-related failures to accommodate, discrimination, and retaliation. The district court granted summary judgment to the State Department. The D.C. Circuit reviewed the judgment de novo and affirmed.