Porter v. Shah

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• holding that a negative performance assessment placed in the plaintiffs personnel file constituted a material adverse action
• holding that verbal criticism without subsequent consequences for plaintiff’s job did not constitute a materially adverse action
• ruling that negative assessment of plaintiff together with his placement on Performance Improvement Plan could have affected his “position, grade level, salary, or promotion opportunities” and was materially adverse
• holding that an “overhaul” of selection criteria that “affected all applicants equally” and had “nothing in its text or about its circumstances [tying] it to discrimination” did not indicate pretext
• holding that interim assessment was not a materially adverse action because it “did not affect Porter’s ‘position, grade level, salary, or promotion opportunities.’” (quoting Taylor v. Solis, 571 F.3d 1313, 1321 (D.C. Cir. 2009))
• finding that plaintiff “plainly lacked the ‘stark superiority of credentials’ over [the selectee] that can give rise to an inference of pretext”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).