Prima Facie Case of Discrimination
In this case plaintiff can easily prove the four elements required to establish a prima facie case of color, religion, race, and national origin discrimination:
(1)That he is within a protected class for the relevant law
(Plaintiff is a Muslim ,Caucasians White, and was born in Syria Arab Republic, and it is beyond doubt that Caucasians Muslims born in Syria or any Arab country are protected by US constitution.(See St. Francis Collegev V Al-Khazraji, 481 U.S. 604 (1987) Muslim Arabs are covered by Anti-Discrimination law).
(2)that he was qualified for his job or performing the duties of his job at level meeting the legitimate expectations of his employer See Discovery documents –Plaintiff provided numerous Superior and satisfactory working evaluations signed by different defendant employees See Legitimate work section, Plaintiff respond to defendant statement of genuine facts –statement 18-B ).
(3)That he suffered As a result of adverse employment Action
Plaintiff was fired, terminated and Prohibited from being promoted - It is beyond dispute that a termination constitutes an adverse action. Pegram, 361 F.3d at 283 (citing Mota v. Univ. of Tex. Houston Health Sci. Ctr., 261 F.3d 512, 519 (5th Cir. 2001)).
(4) That a person outside the protected class was thereafter (A)selected for the job in question( Defendant selected African black ) Or (B)promoted in the job in question(All those promoted were Non-Caucasians ).
The prove of the fourth element and also favorably treating Black and Nigerian employees is very simple A-All the plaintiff co-workers ( resident physicians) who were promoted are NON Caucasians and Non White ,(See Sara Doyle supplemental response to the EEOC which includes description of those people race and dates for hire and promotion –See also those people race and origin in Morehouse first answer to plaintiffs first Interrogatories . B- Defendant employed an African person to replace plaintiff and take his Position(Ms M Taylor ). Morehouse promoted Ms M.T to PGY-2 without even employing her as PGY-1 at Morehouse in 2005 , Further in a horrible discriminatory action Morehouse interviewed Ms Taylor for the job during plaintiff employment .(See Rose Deposition about Ms Taylor race,color, Rose Dep 2nd part Page 75 ,color-See Mr Booth deposition explanation for interviewing Taylor for the job during plaintiff employment as this is the director privilege ) . C –Based on the Documents produced by the EEOC Morehouse promoted its African employee Ms Clayton to be a PGY-2 although her first year was ranked marginal and she had a significant patient care problems ,while Morehouse refused to promote plaintiff even if he can finish his first year as Marginal.
(See Dr Clayton documents which were produced by the EEOC
See Rose Deposition Page 59 Line 10-14.(Rose statement under Oath (Line 10 The answer is: Ms. Clayton was given a marginal her first year and was allowed to go on to the second year. She -- I believe she completed that second year and was given credit for that. )
D-During the last 10 years the only Medicine Resident terminated by Morehouse during his first year PGY-1 was the plaintiff( Dr Khattab).