Intelligent Waves, LLC v. Marthe Lattinville-Pace

On April 1, 2019, Intelligent Waves, LLC (“IW”) hired Marthe Lattinville-Pace (“Ms. Lattinville-Pace” or “Respondent”), a 66-year-old person allegedly of French-Canadian decent, as their Senior Vice President of Human Resources. On Wednesday, July 22, 2020, IW terminated her employment. Ms. Lattinville-Pace responded by filing allegations of national origin and age discrimination with the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (“EEOC”), who, after a thorough investigation finding no discrimination, issued a Dismissal and Notice of Right to Sue on March 25, 2021. Despite the EEOC’s decision not supporting her meritless allegations, Ms. Lattinville-Pace brought her case to the Eastern District of Virginia, which dismissed both allegations with prejudice holding, as it relates to age discrimination, that the First Amended Complaint (“FAC”) only asserted conclusory allegations and did not assert requisite but-for causation. The Fourth Circuit affirmed the dismissal of the national origin allegation, but reversed the district court’s ruling regarding age discrimination. Failing to apply but-for causation, the court held that Ms. Lattinville-Pace’s claim supported a plausible inference that Ms. Lattinville-Pace was terminated due to her age, despite not naming a single fact from the complaint connecting Ms. Lattinville-Pace’s age to her termination. The question presented is: Does a claim of age discrimination under 29 U.S.C. § 621 et seq. fail in the absence of but-for causation?