9th Circuit Takes Up Class Certification Appeal in Microsoft Gender Discrimination Case
The court will review a decision from June by a federal judge in Seattle who found there were no uniform policies or job descriptions that tied together the thousands of women working in technical positions at Microsoft across multiple states who were part of the proposed class.
September 21, 2018 at 01:17 PM
3 minute read
A federal appellate court has taken up an appeal of a decision denying class certification to thousands of women employed in technical positions at Microsoft who claimed they were systematically passed over for promotions and raises.
The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit took up an intermediate appeal of the ruling denying class certification in the gender discrimination case Thursday. The Ninth Circuit will review a June decision by U.S. District Judge James Robart of the Western District of Washington who found there were no uniform policies or job descriptions that tied together the thousands of women across multiple states who were part of the proposed class.
A Microsoft spokesman said in a statement that the company continues to believe “that the judge made the right decision in denying class certification.”
“There is no bias in Microsoft's pay and promotion practices,” the spokesman said. “We remain committed to increasing diversity and making sure that Microsoft continues to be a workplace where everyone has an equal opportunity to succeed.”
The company is represented by a team from Orrick, Herrington & Sutcliffe.
Plaintiffs in the case are represented by co-lead counsel at plaintiff-side employment law firm Outten & Golden and national class action firm Lieff Cabraser Heimann & Bernstein.
Lieff Cabraser's Kelly Dermody said in a statement that “the evidence here demands that Microsoft's common discriminatory systems be addressed on a class basis so that women at the company can get justice.”
Plaintiffs' petition for permission to appeal the district court's class certification ruling had the backing of more than 30 civil rights, labor and women's rights groups who filed an amicus brief.
The brief challenged the way Robart handled declarations from plaintiffs, claiming the judge “erected an arbitrary numerical threshold” for the necessary anecdotal evidence to push forward with class claims.
“Women may also be reluctant to accuse their managers of sexism where the biased judgments that have inhibited their advancement are subtle or undocumented,” wrote Jocelyn Larkin of the nonprofit Impact Fund, in the amicus brief. “This reticence will be particularly acute in industries, like tech, where women have traditionally been underrepresented,” she wrote.
Read more:
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2024 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View AllContract Software Unicorn Ironclad Hires Former Pinterest Lawyer as GC
2 minute readSouthern California Law Firms Boast Industry-Leading Revenue, Demand Through Q3
Gibson Dunn Sued By Crypto Client After Lateral Hire Causes Conflict of Interest
Trending Stories
- 1Gibson Dunn Sued By Crypto Client After Lateral Hire Causes Conflict of Interest
- 2Trump's Solicitor General Expected to 'Flip' Prelogar's Positions at Supreme Court
- 3Pharmacy Lawyers See Promise in NY Regulator's Curbs on PBM Industry
- 4Outgoing USPTO Director Kathi Vidal: ‘We All Want the Country to Be in a Better Place’
- 5Supreme Court Will Review Constitutionality Of FCC's Universal Service Fund
Who Got The Work
Michael G. Bongiorno, Andrew Scott Dulberg and Elizabeth E. Driscoll from Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr have stepped in to represent Symbotic Inc., an A.I.-enabled technology platform that focuses on increasing supply chain efficiency, and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The case, filed Oct. 2 in Massachusetts District Court by the Brown Law Firm on behalf of Stephen Austen, accuses certain officers and directors of misleading investors in regard to Symbotic's potential for margin growth by failing to disclose that the company was not equipped to timely deploy its systems or manage expenses through project delays. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Nathaniel M. Gorton, is 1:24-cv-12522, Austen v. Cohen et al.
Who Got The Work
Edmund Polubinski and Marie Killmond of Davis Polk & Wardwell have entered appearances for data platform software development company MongoDB and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The action, filed Oct. 7 in New York Southern District Court by the Brown Law Firm, accuses the company's directors and/or officers of falsely expressing confidence in the company’s restructuring of its sales incentive plan and downplaying the severity of decreases in its upfront commitments. The case is 1:24-cv-07594, Roy v. Ittycheria et al.
Who Got The Work
Amy O. Bruchs and Kurt F. Ellison of Michael Best & Friedrich have entered appearances for Epic Systems Corp. in a pending employment discrimination lawsuit. The suit was filed Sept. 7 in Wisconsin Western District Court by Levine Eisberner LLC and Siri & Glimstad on behalf of a project manager who claims that he was wrongfully terminated after applying for a religious exemption to the defendant's COVID-19 vaccine mandate. The case, assigned to U.S. Magistrate Judge Anita Marie Boor, is 3:24-cv-00630, Secker, Nathan v. Epic Systems Corporation.
Who Got The Work
David X. Sullivan, Thomas J. Finn and Gregory A. Hall from McCarter & English have entered appearances for Sunrun Installation Services in a pending civil rights lawsuit. The complaint was filed Sept. 4 in Connecticut District Court by attorney Robert M. Berke on behalf of former employee George Edward Steins, who was arrested and charged with employing an unregistered home improvement salesperson. The complaint alleges that had Sunrun informed the Connecticut Department of Consumer Protection that the plaintiff's employment had ended in 2017 and that he no longer held Sunrun's home improvement contractor license, he would not have been hit with charges, which were dismissed in May 2024. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Jeffrey A. Meyer, is 3:24-cv-01423, Steins v. Sunrun, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Greenberg Traurig shareholder Joshua L. Raskin has entered an appearance for boohoo.com UK Ltd. in a pending patent infringement lawsuit. The suit, filed Sept. 3 in Texas Eastern District Court by Rozier Hardt McDonough on behalf of Alto Dynamics, asserts five patents related to an online shopping platform. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Rodney Gilstrap, is 2:24-cv-00719, Alto Dynamics, LLC v. boohoo.com UK Limited.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250