Shahrashoob v. Texas A&M University

United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · January 8, 2025 · No. 23-20618

Summary

The United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit affirmed the district court's grant of summary judgment in favor of Texas A&M University in a Title VII employment discrimination and retaliation case. The court held that the plaintiff forfeited her arguments regarding replacement and similarly situated comparators by failing to raise them in the district court, and further determined that she failed to establish a prima facie case or demonstrate pretext regardless. Consequently, both her discrimination and retaliation claims were dismissed.

Court
United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit
Writing for the Court
Willett; Douglas; Morales
Jurisdiction
United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit
Decision date
January 8, 2025
Docket number
23-20618
Procedural posture
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas granting summary judgment on both Title VII discrimination and retaliation claims.
Standard of review
de novo
Precedential value
published
Parties
Texas A&M University v. Zahra Shahrashoob
Disposition
affirmed

Topics

title viiemployment discriminationretaliation

Practice areas

employment law

Questions Presented

  1. Whether Dr. Shahrashoob established a prima facie Title VII discrimination claim based on replacement and similarly situated employee analysis.
  2. Whether Dr. Shahrashoob established a prima facie Title VII retaliation claim and demonstrated pretext for the employer's stated reasons.

Holdings

  1. The court affirmed summary judgment, holding that Dr. Shahrashoob forfeited her replacement and comparator arguments and, even assuming they were preserved, failed to make out a prima facie discrimination case.
  2. The court affirmed summary judgment, holding that although Dr. Shahrashoob made out a prima facie retaliation claim, she failed to show a conflict in substantial evidence that the employer's budgetary and teaching‑needs reasons were pretextual.

Key quotations

Summary judgment is proper “if the movant shows that there is no genuine dispute as to any material fact and the movant is entitled to judgment as a matter of law.” Fed. R. Civ. P. 56(a).

Factual background

Dr. Zahra Shahrashoob, an Iranian woman, was hired by Texas A&M University as a lecturer and later as an instructional assistant professor. After a series of contract renewals, the university shortened her final appointment to four-and-a-half months and did not renew it. She alleged discrimination and retaliation, asserting that a newly hired Indian male instructor, Dr. Mohammad Alam, replaced her and that the university's stated reasons were pretextual.

Procedural history

The district court granted summary judgment in favor of Texas A&M University on Dr. Shahrashoob's discrimination and retaliation claims. The Fifth Circuit reviewed the grant de novo.

Court Document

Open PDF
Loading document…