Opinion ID: 179625
Heading Depth: 2
Heading Rank: 3

Heading: Ray’s Other Claims

Text: Ray asserts that Pinnacle refused to explain why Dr. Kostin prevented him from being appointed to the faculty of the surgical residency program and that no other surgeon who asked was denied appointment. He argues that, as he was the only Asian Indian surgeon on staff, the reasonable inference to be drawn is that the failure to appoint him was the result of prejudice. Pinnacle, however, showed that its concerns about Ray’s patient outcomes dated back to at least 1999 under a different head of surgery, Dr. Weiss. Subsequently, in 2002, the surgical faculty, not Dr. Kostin, considered appointing Ray to the residency faculty but decided against because of QA concerns. Moreover, Pinnacle showed that it had other Asians on the residency faculty including physicians from Pakistan and the Philippines. In short, Ray failed to carry his burden to raise an inference of racial discrimination on this claim. 2. Failure to Provide Information to the Carlisle Hospital Ray offers nothing beyond his personal belief in support of his claim that Pinnacle failed to provide information to the Carlisle Hospital because he was of Indian descent. This is insufficient to carry his burden, particularly in light of undisputed documentary and testimonial evidence that Pinnacle did provide all of the information Carlisle originally sought.