A federal judge on Monday hinted that he may dismiss at least some of the claims brought against Jones Day in a proposed $200 million class action lawsuit over alleged gender discrimination.

Jones Day lawyer Jacob Roth said during a hearing Monday that the former female lawyers at the firm behind the claims—represented by attorneys at Sanford Heisler Sharp—had merely made the assertions without providing much, if any, evidence to back them up. The hearing was over a motion for partial judgment on the pleadings, filed by Jones Day in July.

For example, Roth argued that Moss should dismiss allegations that male associates are disproportionately promoted compared to female associates. Roth said information on promotions is made publicly available by Jones Day and that Sanford Heisler lawyers could have run those numbers and included them in the complaint.

Judge Randolph Moss of the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia seemed to side with Roth's argument. "I could probably go back to my chambers and figure it out in 15 minutes," the judge said.

Sanford Heisler attorney Deborah Marcuse said that more information was needed to make such a comparison, like which year each of the promoted attorneys started in the firm, and how many women from that class were made partner compared to men.

But Moss remained doubtful, saying the claim of discriminatory promotions depends on each class of associates that are made partner, and isn't necessarily dependent on the rest of the lawyers in that starting class.

Marcuse generally urged Moss to view the allegations from a broader lens, saying the claims, taken together, paint a picture of a firm that doesn't compensate female associates the same as it does male associates for equal work.

On other claims, Moss seemed less sure that he should throw them out. He noted that at this stage of the litigation, he is required to rule in a more favorable light for the plaintiffs.

And he pointed out that Jones Day has exclusive control over a great deal of the data that the plaintiffs are seeking, meaning the Sanford Heisler lawyers are at an inherent disadvantage.

Moss also said some of the claims made against the firm, like an alleged policy of employees not sharing compensation information, would make it more difficult for the Sanford Heisler lawyers to get that compensation data from outside sources, like associates who have left the firm.

The hearing was held days after Jones Day filed for sanctions against the Sanford Heisler attorneys, arguing its lawyers failed to research whether the firm actually pays male associates more than female associates.

"Plaintiffs' pay discrimination claims are based on the misconceived and legally baseless notion that all lawyers in all geographic markets have, at all times over the past decade, been entitled to so-called 'Cravath scale' regardless of the quality of their performance or their productivity," the Jones Day lawyers wrote in the filing, made earlier this month.

That matter is currently being briefed and did not come up during Monday's hearing.

Correction: This post has been updated to accurately reflect Moss's comments about how he should rule regarding the plaintiffs, not the defendants, in this case.

Read more: