Court Opinion

ID: 2963593
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2015-09-21 21:12:32.892375+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T11:42:43.614641
License: Public Domain

USCA1 Opinion

	

                                [NOT FOR PUBLICATION]
                            UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
                                FOR THE FIRST CIRCUIT
                     

                                 ____________________

        No. 94-2176 

                                JOSEPH ANTHONY FAUSTO,

                                Plaintiff, Appellant,

                                          v.

                                 JOHN J. WELCH, JR.,
                            ACTING SECRETARY OF AIR FORCE,

                                 Defendant, Appellee.

                                 ____________________

                     APPEAL FROM THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

                          FOR THE DISTRICT OF MASSACHUSETTS

                       [Hon. Mark L. Wolf, U.S. District Judge]
                                           ___________________

                                 ____________________

                                        Before

                                Cyr, Boudin and Lynch,
                                   Circuit Judges.
                                   ______________

                                 ____________________

            Joseph Anthony Fausto on brief pro se.
            _____________________
            Donald K.  Stern, United  States Attorney,  and Thomas E.  Kanwit,
            ________________                                _________________
        Assistant United States Attorney, on brief for appellee.

                                 ____________________

                                   August 29, 1995
                                 ____________________

                      Per  Curiam.   Plaintiff-appellant  Joseph  Anthony
                      ___________

            Fausto   appeals  pro  se  from  entry  of  summary  judgment
                              ___  __

            disposing  of  his  claim that  the  Air  Force discriminated

            against  him, based on his gender, when it failed to hire him

            as an administrative officer.  For the following  reasons, we

            affirm.

                                          I.

                 The  relevant background  is  fully  and accurately  set

            forth in the  district court's memorandum  and order, and  we

            need only  provide a  brief summary here.   On May  29, 1984,

            Fausto applied  for the position  of Administrative  Officer,

            GS-11,  at an  Air  Force  facility  located  in  Wilmington,

            Massachusetts.  The  evidence in the record  establishes that

            Fausto  was  one  of eight  candidates  interviewed  for this

            position;  that  the  candidates   were  scored  after  their

            interviews; that Fausto  received the lowest score;  and that

            Fausto's low score was due,  in part, to his poor performance

            during his oral interview.1   There is some evidence that the

            highest scoring candidate,  a woman, was offered the  job and

            declined for  personal reasons.   In any  event, none  of the

            remaining  candidates was offered the position.  Instead, the

            job  was  restructured  as  a  GS-9  developmental  position,

                                
            ____________________

            1.  Fausto suggests,  without  evidentiary  basis,  that  the
            other  interviewees  never  existed.    In  addition,  Fausto
            submitted his own affidavit proclaiming that he had performed
            well during his oral interview.  

            reannounced, and  eventually offered to Rosemary  Tremblay, a

            woman   who  had   been  shouldering   many   of  the   job's

            responsibilities for some months.

                 Having  exhausted  his administrative  remedies,  Fausto

            filed suit in  the district court  against defendant-appellee

            John J.  Welch,  Jr.,  Acting Secretary  of  the  Air  Force,

            alleging discriminatory  treatment in violation of  Title VII

            of the  Civil Rights Act  of 1964, 42  U.S.C.   2000e.   Both

            parties  moved for  summary judgment.    The district  court,

            relying  on the  three-stage,  burden-shifting framework  set

            forth  in McDonnell  Douglas  Corp. v.  Green,  411 U.S.  792
                      _________________________     _____

            (1973), found that Fausto had established a prima facie  case
                                                        _____ _____

            of discrimination.   The court  found, however, that  the Air

            Force  successfully   had   rebutted   the   presumption   of

            discrimination  arising from  Fausto's  prima  facie case  by
                                                    _____  _____

            articulating a legitimate,  non-discriminatory reason for its

            decision,  namely, Fausto's low  candidate ranking.  Finally,

            the court concluded that Fausto had failed to submit evidence

            sufficient  to permit a  reasonable factfinder to  infer that

            the Air Force discriminated against him because he is a male.

            Accordingly, the court  granted summary judgment in  favor of

            the Air Force.2

                                
            ____________________

            2.  Fausto  also alleges  in  his complaint  that he  was the
            victim of retaliation  for filing a complaint with  the Equal
            Employment  Opportunity  Commission.     The  district  court
            granted summary judgment  for the Air Force on  this claim on
            the ground that  Fausto failed to present a  prima facie case
                                                         _____ _____

                                         -3-

                                         II.

                 The basic order and allocation  of burdens of proof in a

            Title VII  discriminatory treatment  case was  limned by  the

            Supreme Court in  McDonnell Douglas, 441 U.S.  at 802-05, and
                              _________________

            expounded in St. Mary's Honor Ctr.  v. Hicks, 113 S. Ct. 2742
                         _____________________     _____

            (1993).   Where,  as here,  there  is no  direct evidence  of

            discrimination,  the plaintiff  bears the  initial burden  of

            establishing a prima facie case of discrimination.  See Smith
                           _____ _____                          ___ _____

            v. Stratus  Computer, Inc., 40  F.3d 11, 15 (1st  Cir. 1994),
               _______________________

            cert.  denied, 115  S. Ct.  1958  (1995).   If the  plaintiff
            _____________

            establishes  a prima  facie case,  the burden  shifts to  the
                           _____  _____

            employer  to  articulate   a  legitimate,  non-discriminatory

            reason for its  decision.  See Mesnick v.  General Elec. Co.,
                                       ___ _______     _________________

            950 F.2d 816, 823 (1st Cir. 1991), cert. denied, 504 U.S. 985
                                               ____________

            (1992).    Finally, if  the  employer meets  its  burden, the

            plaintiff must introduce sufficient evidence to show that the

            employer's  justification  is  a pretext  and  that  the true

            reason for its action is  discriminatory.  See Smith, 40 F.3d
                                                       ___ _____

            at 16.   We  review the  grant of  summary judgment  de novo,
                                                                 __ ____

            viewing   the  evidence,   and   the  reasonable   inferences

            therefrom, in  a light most favorable to  the party resisting

            summary  judgment.   Woodman v.  Haemonetics  Corp., 51  F.3d
                                 _______     __________________

            1087, 1091 (1st Cir. 1995).

                                
            ____________________

            of retaliation.   Fausto does not argue that  this was error,
            and we deem the issue waived.  

                                         -4-

                 A.  Defendant's Burden of Production

                 Once  Fausto  made out  a  prima  facie case  of  gender
                                            _____  _____

            discrimination,  the Air Force  was required to  articulate a

            legitimate,   non-discriminatory  reason   for  its   adverse

            decision.  Fausto argues that, in the procedural posture of a

            motion for summary judgment, the district court impermissibly

            judged  the credibility of  the affiants in  determining that

            the Air Force met its  burden.  Fausto also contends, relying

            on  Milton  v. Weinberger,  645  F.2d 1070,  1079  (D.C. Cir.
                ______     __________

            1981), that his  low score, relative to the  other candidates

            who were interviewed,  could not be used to  justify his non-

            selection.  These arguments fail.

                First, an employer's burden at the second stage is merely

            a burden of production; it must introduce evidence  which, if

            "taken as true,"  would permit an inference that  there was a

            non-discriminatory reason for the adverse action.  Hicks, 113
                                                               _____

            S. Ct.  at 2748.   Second, Milton is inapposite.   In Milton,
                                       ______                     ______

            the  District  of  Columbia Circuit  held  that  the relative

            rankings of  candidates before  their  interviews could  not,

            alone, serve as a legitimate  reason for the non-selection of

            the  appellants  where  it was  apparent  that  the selecting

            official did  not rely solely  on these rankings to  make his

            decision.   See Milton,  645 F.2d at  1079.   In the  instant
                        ___ ______

            case, the relative  rankings introduced by the Air Force were

            final  rankings of  the  candidates after  their  interviews.

                                         -5-

            Moreover,   the   Air   Force   introduced   other   evidence

            demonstrating that Fausto's  interview went  poorly and  that

            the  selecting officials believed  he lacked the  capacity to

            perform the job.  Under  the circumstances, the Air Force met

            its burden of production.

                 B.  Plaintiff's Burden of Showing Discriminatory Animus

                 At  the third and  final stage,  Fausto was  required to

            proffer  sufficient evidence to  prove by a  preponderance of

            the evidence that the Air Force's  justification was merely a

            pretext for gender discrimination.  Woodman, 51 F.3d at 1091-
                                                _______

            92.  We are persuaded that Fausto  failed to meet this burden

            essentially for the reasons stated by the district court.  We

            add the following.

                 Contrary to Fausto's  suggestion, the fact that  the Air

            Force   redacted  the  names  of  the  other  candidates  and

            identified them  solely  by their  sex  for purposes  of  its

            summary judgment  motion  does not support an inference  that

            these  candidates  did not  exist or  that their  scores were

            fabricated.  See  Byrd v. Ronayne, 1995 WL 461827  at *3 (1st
                         ___  ____    _______

            Cir. Aug.  9, 1995) (summary  judgment cannot be  defeated by

            reliance "upon conclusory allegations, improbable inferences,

            and  unsupported speculation"  (quoting Medina-Munoz  v. R.J.
                                                    ____________     ____

            Reynold Tobacco Co., 896 F.2d 5, 8 (1st Cir. 1990))). 
            ___________________

                 We also reject Fausto's suggestion that summary judgment

            was improper  because he  submitted evidence  from which,  he

                                         -6-

            claims, it could be inferred that he was better qualified for

            the  position  of administrative  officer  than  was Rosemary

            Tremblay.3   The  unrebutted  evidence  that  both  male  and

            female  candidates  were  passed  over  in  the  decision  to

            restructure the  job  makes  improbable  the  inference  that

            Tremblay was offered the position at a lower grade because of

            her gender.   More importantly, the unrebutted  evidence that

            Fausto  had  the  lowest  ranking  of  the  eight  candidates

            interviewed  renders  implausible the  inference  that gender

            bias was  a motivating factor  in the decision not  to select

            him.  Cf. Gilty v. Village  of Oak Park, 919 F.2d 1247,  1253
                  ___ _____    ____________________

            (7th  Cir. 1990) (upholding  grant of summary  judgment where

            race discrimination claimant would have placed no higher than

            fifth  on the  eligibility list  even in  the absence  of the

            alleged discrimination).

                 Affirmed.
                 ________

                                
            ____________________

            3.  Fausto submitted a  copy of his  form SF-171, a  standard
            government form providing detailed employment history,  and a
            copy of Rosemary Tremblay's resume.

                                         -7-