Protests 942495-G of Mitsubishi Shoji Kaisha, Ltd.

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that “three-year gap between the alleged retaliatory act and the protected activity on which it is predicated is too lengthy to establish an indirect inference of retaliation”
• noting that “the Second Circuit has yet to specifically decide whether and under what circumstances … federal courts have subject matter jurisdiction over the revocation or denial of a security clearance in the Title VII context”
• finding adverse action where plaintiff alleged that employer circulated negative references
• \Title VII does provide a remedy and plaintiff need not and cannot resort to a Bivens claim for his alleged discrimination.\

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).