ESPN headquarters in Bristol/photo by Jkinsocal/Wikimedia Commons

Calling it a "close call," a federal judge in Connecticut ruled in favor of sports broadcaster ESPN Inc. and its corporate parents—Hearst Communications Inc. and The Walt Disney Co.—in a former associate producer's race discrimination lawsuit.

But U.S. District Judge Michael Shea left the door open for a second shot by plaintiff Rachel Pineda, who alleged an ESPN manager told her to "go to Deportes," which is the company's Spanish network, with her ideas for coverage.

ESPN fired Pineda in April 2016 for not successfully completing a company performance improvement plan. Pineda sued, alleging wrongful termination and race discrimination. She is seeking $2.5 million in damages, $100,000 in lost wages, and $200,000 to fund a college scholarship for her son for "his pain and suffering and to compensate his father for my loss of income."

Shea had dismissed several counts that Pineda had leveled against the network in October 2018. They included claims of sex discrimination and alleged violation of the federal Family and Medical Leave Act. At the time, Shea had let the race discrimination portion of the suit remain, and has now allowed an amended complaint from Pineda, who was initially representing herself in court, but has since hired an attorney. The judge gave the plaintiff and her counsel 21 days to amend the complaint.

"Ultimately, I find that the plaintiff has failed to plead enough facts to make it plausible that discrimination on the basis of her Hispanic ethnicity was a motivating factor in her termination," the judge wrote in his 12-page ruling. "Nonetheless, it is a close call."

Shea said he was looking for Pineda's counsel to file an amended complaint that gave "more facts about the content" of the allegedly discriminatory remarks from department manager Valerie Gordon, and "any connection to [Pineda's] firing, to nudge the claim across the plausibility line."

"We will be filing an amended complaint," Pineda's lawyer, Waterbury-based solo practitioner Michelle Holmes, said Monday. "As Rachel was originally pro se, I think I can cull together a complaint that more articulates her discrimination claims. But there is still an opportunity for resolution, and we are exploring those opportunities."

Representing ESPN are attorneys Raymond Bertrand and James De Haan, both with the San Diego, California, offices of Paul Hastings. Both attorneys declined to comment on the case Monday.

Mike Soltys, an ESPN representative, also declined to comment on the matter.

Shea ruled last year against Pineda's various claims not related to race discrimination. They included claims from the former employee that management ridiculed her status as a single mother.

As it relates to racial discrimination, Shea noted that Pineda claims the network "continues to frame the experience of Latinos in America as an immigrant story, rather than including voices from third, fourth, or more generation American-Hispanics." She alleged "ESPN actively works to enforce hatred of immigrants, and continuously illustrates the narrative of non-white Americans as being 'others,' while also not giving the same opportunities to Hispanics that are provided to white employees."

Pineda also claimed to have had negative encounters, which she attributes to her race, with co-workers. In one such incident, she claimed she was asked if she worked in the cafeteria. She further claimed a supervisor "mocked racial categories that are used to describe ethnic minorities in the United States, including a comment in which he identified himself as a 'generic white male producer."'

But these allegations, as presented, fell short.

"Plaintiff does not specify when any of these events occurred," the judge wrote. The allegations in the pleading were "insufficient to survive a motion to dismiss, and because they are so vague and devoid of any apparent connection to plaintiff of her termination, they add nothing to plaintiff's few specific factual allegations."

Read more:

Judge Rules for ESPN on Most Claims in Discrimination Suit by Fired Associate Producer