# U ni te d S ta te s Co ur t of A pp ea ls For the Eig hth Circu it

__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ _
No. 1 8- 14 39

__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ _
Co rri e Nel so n

ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll l Pla in ti

ff - App el la nt

v.

USAbl e Mu tu al Ins ur an ce Co m pa ny, doi ng bu si ne ss as Ark an sa s B lu e Cro ss an d Bl ue Sh ie ld

ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll l

Defe nd an t - Ap pe ll ee

__ __ __ __ __ __ App eal fro m

Uni te d S ta te s Di st ric t Co ur t fo r th e Eas te rn Dis tri ct of Ark an sa s - P in e Bl uf f

__ __ __ __ __ __
Su bm it te d: Jan ua ry

16 , 20 19 Fi le d: Marc h 2 2, 2 01 9

__ __ __ __ __ __ Befo re BENTON, MELLOY, an d KELLY, Circ ui t J ud ge s.

__ __ __ __ __ __ MELLOY, Circu it Ju dg e.Pl ai nt iff Co rri e Nels on ap pe al s th e di st ric t co ur t’s gr an t of su m m ary jud gm en t 1

ag ai n s t h e r 42 U.S.C. § 19 81 race -d is cri m in at io n cl ai m

. Hav in g juri sd ic ti on un de r 28 U.S.C. § 1 29 1, we af

fir m

.

I. Back gr ou nd

Nels on , an Afri can -Am eri can wom an , be ga n wor ki ng at Ark an sa s Bl ue Cro ss

an d Bl ue Sh ie ld (“ ABCBS ”) i n May 20 04

. Sh e st art ed as a Cu st om er Serv ic e Rep res en ta ti ve , be cam e a Cl ai m s Sp eci al is t, an d no w wor ks as a M a rk et Serv ic e Rep re s e n t at iv e. As a Mar ke t Serv ic e Rep res en ta ti ve , Nels on “ is res po ns ib le fo r

co or di na ti ng an d co nd uc ti ng al l en ro ll m en t act iv it y fo r ne w gr ou p cu st om ers .” W hil e

wor ki ng at ABCBS
, Nels on was no m in at ed fo r a n d p a rti ci pa te d in ABCBS ’s Lead ers hi p Dev el op m en t In it ia ti ve , a pr og ram de si gn ed to he lp em pl oyees d ev el op

m an ag em en t sk il ls

. Pri or to wor ki ng at ABCBS
, Nels on wor ke d as a sa le sp ers on fo r el ev en y ears in ret ai l cl ot hi ng st or es , in cl ud in g T.J. Max an d Nin e W es t. Nels on ha s

a m as te r’s de gr ee i n m an ag em en t.

In Mar ch 20 14
, Velm a Bea rd en , ABCBS ’s Cu st om er Serv ic e Su pe r v i so r,

an no un ced th at sh e was pl an ni ng to ret ire i n J u n e 20 14

. In an ti ci pa ti on of th e

va can cy , ABCBS up gr ad ed th e Cu st om er Serv ic e Su pe rv is or po si ti on to Man ag er of Ope rat io ns fo r th e So ut he as t reg io n an d Pi ne Bl uf f of fic e. The job de sc rip ti on read :

Thi s po si ti on is acco un ta bl e fo r pr ov id in g th e ov eral l op erat io n of al l fu nc ti on s in th e reg io n. The in cu mb e n t is res po ns ib le fo r pr ov id in g
co m m u ni cat io n

. . . be twee n th e Org an iz at io n an d it s cu st om ers , pr ov id ers of care an d gro up ad m in is tra to rs as well as wor ki ng wit h th e

m ark et in g te am s to pr ov id e su pe rio r se rv ic e to ou r ex is ti ng m em be rs an d pr od uc e ex cep ti on al pr op os al m at eri al s for p ro sp ect iv e m em be rs

. The in cu m be nt is res po ns ib le fo r th e fu nc ti on s rel at ed t o p u rch as in g,

The H o n o r a b l e Ja m es M. Mo od y Jr
., Uni te d St at es Dis tri ct Ju dg e fo r th e 1 East ern Dis tri ct of Ark an sa s.

-2

-bui ldi ng m an ag em en t/ se cu rit y , su pp ly req ui si ti on s an d pe rs on ne l po li cy

m at te rs

.

The “ job req ui rem en ts ” in cl ud ed : (1 ) A “ [c]ol le ge de gr ee or rel at ed ex pe rie nc e”; (2 )

“ Two

. . . t o fo ur

. . . years of ex pe rie nc e in a su pe rv is or y or m an ag eri al cap aci ty i s de si red ”; (3 ) “ Two

. . . y ears ex pe rie nc e in Cu st om er/ Pro vi de r Rel at io ns is pr efer red ”; (4 ) “ Exp eri en ce is de si red in th e pe rs on al co m pu te r en vi ro nm en t” ; an d (5 ) “ Rel at ed

ex pe rie nc e an d ed uc at io n m ay be su bs ti tu te d fo r an y pa rt of th e ab ov e req ui rem en ts .”

Bryan Dor at hy, ABCBS ’s reg io na l ex ecu ti ve fo r th e So ut he as t reg io n, was in ch arg e of fil li ng th e po si ti on

. Dor at hy in te rv ie wed th ree em pl oyees fo r th e po si ti on : Nels on , M e l is sa W at ki ns , an d Ja so n Aud

. W at ki ns an d Aud are bo th Cau cas ia n. Dor at hy ask ed each ap pl ic an t t he same q ue st io ns an d sc or ed th ei r res po ns es 1– 5 i n el ev en se pa rat e cat eg or ie s. Du rin g t he in te rv ie ws, Do rat hy tol d t he can di da te s th at he was lo ok in g fo r so m eo ne wit h ret ai l ex pe rie nc e be cau se th e ne w Man ag er of Ope rat io ns wou ld be res po ns ib le fo r de ve lo pi ng a ret ai l st or efro nt co nc ep t at th e Pi ne Bl uf f of fic e whe re cu st om ers c o u l d c o m e in
, as k qu es ti on s, an d se le ct in su ran ce
pr od uc ts

. In th ei r res pe ct iv e in te rv ie ws, W at ki n s s c o r e d a 45 an d Nels on sc or ed a 42 .5. The y

were t he two hi gh es t s co rin g c an di da te s.

W at ki ns ha d be gu n wor ki ng at ABCBS in Mar ch 20 04 as a Cu st om er Serv ic e Rep res en ta ti ve

. Sh e ev en tu al ly be cam e a Pro du ct Sp eci al is t an d th en a Larg e Gro up In te rn al Serv ic e Rep res en ta ti ve

. In Octo be r 20 13
, W at ki ns as su m ed th e po si ti on of Reg io na l Fi na nc ia l Ri sk Man ag er Trai ne e fo r th e So ut he as t reg io n. Pri or to wor ki ng
at ABCBS
, W at ki ns ha d wor ke d fo r al m os t th r e e y ears at All te ll Co m m un ic at io ns ,
a wire le ss se rv ic e pr ov id er, as a Key A c co un t Rep res en ta ti ve

. Her res po ns ib il it ie s in th at po si t i o n in cl ud ed “ [a]ss is t[i ng ] cu st om ers wit h bi ll in g in qu iri es , sa le s, rat e

-3

-ch an ge s, rat e an al y si s, [an d] eq ui pm en t de li ve rie s.” W at ki ns ha s a ba ch el or ’s de gr ee

in bu si ne ss ad m in is tra ti on

. 2

On May 27
, 20 1 4
, D o r at hy se le ct ed W at ki ns ov er Nels on to be th e ne w Man ag er of Ope rat io ns fo r th e So ut he as t reg io n an d Pi ne Bl uf f of fic e. In hi s affi d av it s, Dor at hy st at es th at he ch os e W at ki ns be cau se “ sh e sc or ed th e hi gh es t du rin g th e i n t e rv ie ws” an d he r “ du ti es at All te ll ” were “ ex tre m el y si m il ar” to wha t Dor at hy “ en vi si on ed fo r th e Pi ne Bl uf f lo cat io n

. ” On Apr il 12
, 20 16
, Nels on fil ed th e pr es en t su it al le gi ng race di sc riminat io n in vi ol at io n of 42 U.S.C. § 1 98 1 ba se d

o n A B CBS’s fai lu re to pr om ot e he r ov er W at ki ns

. The di st ric t co ur t gr an te d

su m m ary jud gm en t in fav or of ABCBS

. The co ur t fo un d th at wh i l e Nels on ha d

es ta bl is he d a pr im a faci e cas e of di sc riminat io n ba se d on ABCBS ’s se le c t io n of
W at ki ns ov er Nels on , ABCBS art ic ul at ed a le gi ti m at e, no nd is cri m in at or y reas on fo r

se le ct in g Watk in s, an d Nel so n fa il ed to de m on st rat e th at th e rea so n was pre te xt for di sc riminat io n. Nel so n t im el y fil ed th is ap pe al

.

II. St an da rd of R ev ie w

“ W e rev ie w th e di st ric t co ur t’s g r an t of su m m ary jud gm en t de no vo ,
c o n s id eri ng th e ev id en ce an d m ak in g al l reas on ab le in fere nc es ‘in th e li gh t m os t fav or ab le to th e no nm ov in g pa rty. ’” B u n c h v. Uni v. of Ark

. Bd

. of Trs., 86 3 F.3 d
10 62
, 10 66 (8 th Ci r. 20 17 ) (ci ta ti on om it te d)

. “ Su m m ary jud gm en t sh al l be gr an te d

Nels on as se rts in he r op en in g br ie f th at W at ki ns ha s a ba ch el or ’s de gr ee in 2 bu si ne ss ad m in is tra ti on

. In he r rep ly br ie f, ho wev er, Nels on arg u e s t h a t it is on ly

“ as su m ed th at Ms

. W at ki ns po ss es se d a ba ch el or ’s de gr ee” an d im pl ie s th at W at ki ns

“ ha d no t co m

pl et ed co ll eg e.” Nels on , ho wev er, di d no t qu es ti on W at ki ns ’s ed uc at io n in he r br ie fin g be fo r e t h e di st ric t co ur t or , a s no te d, in he r op en in g br ie f on ap pe al

. In ad di ti on , Nels on st at ed in he r Ju ne 14
, 20 17 de po si ti on th at W at ki n s s t u d i ed bu si ne ss ad m in is tra ti on at J oh n B ro wn Un iv ers it y an d g rad ua te d.

-4

-‘if th e m ov an t sh ows th at th ere is no ge nu in e di sp ut e as to an y m at eri al fact an d th e

m ov an t i s e n ti tl ed to jud gm en t as a m at te r of la w.’ ” Id

. (q uo ti ng Fed

. R. Ci v. P. 56 (a))

.

III. Di sc us si on

A pl ai nt iff su in g fo r race di sc riminat io n may s u r v iv e a m ot io n fo r su m m ary jud gm en t by “ pr es en t[i ng ] ad m is si bl e ev id en ce di rect ly in di cat in g u nl awfu l di sc riminat io n

. . . or crea t[i ng ] an in fere nc e of un la wfu l di sc riminat io n u n d er th e bu rd en -s hi fti ng fram ewo rk es ta bl is he d in M c D on ne ll Dou gl as Co rp . v . Gr een , 4 11 U.S. 79 2 (1 97 3) .” Mac kl in v. FMC Tran sp ., In c., 81 5 F.3 d 42 5, 42 7 (8 th Ci r. 20 16 ) (ci ta ti on an d in te rn al qu ot at io n m ark s om it te d)

. Nels on pr es en te d no ev id en ce di rect ly in di cat in g un la wfu l di sc riminat io n so we a n a l y ze he r cl ai m un de r th e McDo nn el l Do ug la s b ur de n- sh ift in g fr am ewo rk

.

Und er McDo nn el l Dou gl as , a pl ai nt iff “ m us t fir st es ta bl is h a pr im a faci e cas e of di sc riminat io n.” Torg ers o n v

. C i t y of Ro ch es te r, 64 3 F.3 d 10 31
, 10 46 (8 th Ci r. 20 11 ) (en ba nc ). Here, Nels on ha s es ta bl is he d a pr im a faci e cas e be cau se “ (1 ) sh e is in a pr ot ect ed cl as s; (2 ) sh e was qu al ifi ed fo r [th e Ope rat io ns Man ag er] po si ti on ; (3 ) sh e was de ni ed th at po si ti on ; and (4 ) [ABCB S] fil le d th e po si ti on wit h a pe rs on no t in th e sa m e p ro te ct ed cla ss .” Id . (ci ta ti on om it te d)

.

Nex t, th e bu rd en sh ift s to th e em pl oyer to “ art ic ul at e a le gi ti m at e,

n o n d is cri m in at or y reas on fo r no t hi rin g” th e pl ai nt iff

. Id

. (ci ta ti on om it te d)

. Th i s bu rd en is “ no t on ero us .” Id

. at 10 47 (ci ta ti on om it te d)

. Here, ABCBS m et th is bu rd en

. ABCBS ’s pr of

fere d le git im at e, nond isc ri m ina tor y re ason s fo r hi rin g W at ki ns

ov er Nels on were: (1 ) W at ki ns sc or ed hi gh er on th e in te rv ie w; an d (2 ) he r re t a i l

ex pe rie nc e at All te ll was m or e di rect ly rel ev an t to th e st or efro nt co nc ep t th at ABCBS

wan te d t o d ev el op at t he Pin e Bl uf f of fic e.

-5

-Fi na ll y , th e bu rd en sh ift s ba ck to th e pl ai nt i f f t o d e m on st rat e th at th e reas on of fere d by th e em

pl oyer was pr et ex t fo r di sc riminat io n. Id

. at 10 46

. A pl ai nt iff can sh ow pr et ex t i n a t le as t two way s: (1 ) “ [a] pl ai nt iff m ay sh ow th at th e em pl oyer’s

ex pl an at io n i s ‘un wor th y of cred en ce

. . . b ecau se it ha s no ba si s in fact ’”; or (2) “ a pl ai nt iff m ay sh ow

. . . ‘tha t a [p ro hi bi te d ] r eas on m or e li ke ly m ot iv at ed th e

em pl oyer.’ ” Id

. at 10 47 (al te rat io n in or ig in al ) (q uo ti ng W al la ce v. DTG Ope rat io ns , In c., 44 2 F.3 d 11 12
, 11 20 (8 th Ci r. 20 06 )). Ult im at el y , th e pl ai nt iff m us t “ sh ow[ ] th at

a pr oh ib it ed reas on , rat he r th an th e em pl oyer’s st at ed reas on , act ua ll y m ot iv at ed th e

em pl oyer’s act io n.” Id.

Here, Nels on ha s no t m et th is bu rd en

. Fi rs t, sh e arg ue s th a t s h e was m or e
qu al ifi ed th an W at ki ns fo r th e po si ti on

. Yet “ a co m pa rat iv e an al y si s o f [th ei r]

qu al ifi cat io ns ” gi ve s us no “ reas on to di sb el ie ve [ABCB S’s] pr of fere d reas on fo r it s

em pl oym en t de ci si on .” Win ga te v. Gag e Ct y

. Sch

. Dis t., No. 34
, 52 8 F.3 d 10 74
, 10 79 (8 th Ci r. 20 08 ) (q u o t i ng Ch am be rs v. Met ro

. Pro p. & Cas

. In s. Co
., 35 1 F.3 d
84 8, 85 7 (8t h Cir. 20 03 )). Bo th wom en sc or ed well on th e in te rv ie w an d were well

acq ua in te d wit h ABCBS pr od uc ts

. In ad di ti on , whi le Nels on ha d m or e y ears of ret ai l

ex pe rie nc e, he r ex pe rie nc e was la rg el y tra ns act io na l, whe reas W at ki ns ’s ex pe rie nc e in vo lv ed pr ov id in g fu ll cu st om er se rv ic e, w h ic h was m or e rel ev an t to th e ret ai l

st or efro nt de ve lo pm en t at th e Pi ne Bl uf f of fic e. Thu s, the co m

pa ris on “ rev eal s th at [Nel so n] was on ly si m il arl y qu al ifi ed ,” an d th eref o r e , “no in fere nc e of [rac e] di sc riminat io n . . . ari se [s ]. ” Id . at 1 08 0.

Seco nd
, Nels on arg ue s th at Dor at hy ha d pr e-s el ect ed W at ki ns fo r th e Man ag er of Ope rat io ns po si ti on an d red uc ed th e m in im um job req ui rem en ts to en su re th at W at ki ns qu al ifi ed

. Sp eci fic al ly, Nels on a r g ue s th at , un li ke ot he r Man ag er of Ope rat io ns po si ti on s wit hi n ABCBS
, th e Man ag er of Ope rat io ns fo r th e So ut he as t

re g i o n an d Pi ne Bl uf

f of fic e di d no t req ui re a co ll eg e de gr ee or m an ag em en t

ex pe rie nc e. It is tru e th at “ ev id en ce of pr es el ect io n an d arb it rary m an ip ul at io n of job

-6

-req ui rem en ts to be ne fit th e pr e-s el ect ed ap pl ic an t m ay act to di sc red it th e de fen da nt ’s

p ro ffer ed ex pl an at io n.” Ty le r v. Uni v. of Ark

. Bd

. of Trs., 62 8 F.3 d 9 8 0
, 9 8 8 ( 8 t h Ci r. 20 11 ). Howev er, even as su m in g th e m in im um job req ui rem en ts were redu ced
, Nels on pr es en ts no ev id en ce, ot he r th an h e r c o n c l us or y al le ga ti on s, th at su gg es ts D o rat hy pr e-s el ect ed W at ki ns or ha d an y ro le in th e red uc ti on

. Mo reo ve r, N e l s o n
pr es en ts no ev id en ce tha t th e red uc ed req ui rem en ts fai le d to “ accu rat el y rep res en t[] th e res po ns ib il it ie s of th e po si ti on .” Dix on v. Pu la sk i Ct y

. Sp eci al Sch

. Dis t., 57 8
F.3 d 86 2, 87 1 (8 th Ci r. 20 09 ) (fi nd in g th at “ up da ti ng a job de sc rip ti on to refl ect th e

cu rren t res po ns ib il it ie s of th e po si ti on is no t it se lf ev id en ce of p r e t e x t” ), ab ro ga te d

on ot he r gr ou nd s b y

Torg ers on , 64 3 F .3d 10 31

.

IV. Co nc lu si on

Ult im at el y , Nels on ha s no t “ pr od uc e[d ] ev id en ce su ffi ci en t to crea te a ge nu in e is su e of m at eri al fact reg ard in g whe th er [ABCB S’s] pr of fere d no nd is cri m in at or y jus ti fic at io ns are m ere p ret ex t fo r in te nt io na l di sc riminat io n.” Torg ers on , 64 3 F .3d

at 10 46 (q uo ti ng Po pe v. ESA Serv s., In c., 40 6 F .3d 10 01
, 10 07 (8 th Ci r. 20 05 )).
Acco rd in gl y , we affi rm

th e jud gm en t o f th e d is tri ct co ur t.

__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __

-7

-