Mark Tackett v. United States Postal Service

Summary

The United States District Court for the Eastern District of Arkansas granted the United States Postal Service’s motion for summary judgment in Mark Tackett’s pro se employment discrimination and retaliation case. The court held that Tackett failed to establish prima facie claims based on the denial of a promotion, the deactivation of workplace devices during medical leave, a request for medical documentation, and two later denied promotions. The case was dismissed with prejudice.

Holdings

1. Tackett failed to establish a prima facie case of discrimination or retaliation concerning the 2019 manager position because the selected employee was a white male of the same age and qualifications, and Tackett had not shown discriminatory animus or protected activity attributable to him before the selection.
2. Deactivation of Tackett's work phone and computer while he was on sick leave was, at most, a minor inconvenience and did not constitute an adverse employment action; therefore, his disability-discrimination and retaliation claims based on the deactivation failed as a matter of law.
3. Tackett failed to establish that the Postal Service's request for updated medical documentation was retaliatory or discriminatory because he did not show an adverse action, discriminatory motive, or causation.
4. Tackett failed to establish prima facie claims for age discrimination or retaliation based on the two 2021 positions because he did not meet the minimum qualifications, the selected employees were also over forty, and he showed no causal connection between his protected activity and the selecting official's decisions.

Questions Presented

1. Whether the Postal Service was entitled to summary judgment on Tackett's claims that the 2019 failure to promote was based on race, gender, color, age, or retaliation.
2. Whether deactivation of Tackett's work phone and computer while he was on sick leave constituted an adverse employment action supporting disability discrimination or retaliation claims.
3. Whether the Postal Service's request for updated medical documentation during Tackett's leave constituted retaliation.
4. Whether the Postal Service was entitled to summary judgment on Tackett's claims that he was denied two 2021 promotions because of age or retaliation.

Disposition

dismissed