Alireza Vazirabadi v. Denver Health and Hospital Authority, et al.

1 QUESTION’S BACKGROUND Respondents refused to hire Petitioner. When Petitioner applied for a position online at Denver Health Hospital and Authority (“DHHA”) in Denver, Colorado, he was asked in what other languages he is fluent—"... able to speak... on a wide variety of topics in a fluid and almost effortless fashion”—he entered Farsi/Persian, identifying his Iranian national origin. The two applied positions required no language fluency. Then, in midst of his online assessment testing, conducted by Respondents’ contractor, CEB, without consent, he was asked: Are you over age 40? He was over 53, so he selected the “Yes” button. Without considering Petitioner’s direct evidence and arguments for: (1) his national origin discrimination cause of action, under Title VII; (2) his age discrimination cause of action, under ADEA1, UGESP2, and (3) to amend his Complaint with new defendants and cause of action; QUESTION PRESENTED Does the Tenth Circuit affirming in favor of Respondents’ summary judgement conflict with Anderson v. Liberty Lobby, Inc.3, where in Tolan v. Cotton4, this Court warranted summary relief because: “[T]he Fifth Circuit failed to adhere to the axiom that in ruling on a motion for summary judgment, "[t]he evidence of the nonmovant is to be believed, and all justifiable inferences are to be drawn in his favor.” Anderson3 ...For that reason, we vacate its decision and remand the case for further proceedings consistent with this opinion.” 1 Age Discrimination in Employment Act of 1967 (ADEA; 29 U.S.C. § 621 to 29 U.S.C. § 634). 2 Uniform Guidelines on Employee Selection Procedures (“UGESP”). 3 477 U.S. 242, 255,106 S.Ct. 2505, 91 L.Ed.2d 202 (1986). 4 134 S. Ct. 1861, 1863, 572 U.S. 650, 188 L. Ed. 2d 895 (2014).