USPTO escapes former examiner’s bias claims
A Virginia judge has handed victory to the US Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO), granting the office’s motion for summary judgment in a discrimination suit brought by a former patent examiner.
Yesterday, February 20, District Judge Thomas Ellis dismissed Ike Nyimpha’s claims that he was dismissed because of his race and age, after finding that Nyimpha had failed to provide enough evidence to show bias played a role in the USPTO’s decision to fire him.
Originally from Ghana, Nyimpha is an African American male, born in 1967.
Nyimpha, in a suit filed in March 2019 at the US District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, accused the agency of discriminating against him on the basis of race, national origin, and age, creating a hostile work environment, and ultimately terminating him from his role as a patent examiner.
According to Nyimpha, his supervisor spoke to him in a “rude or inappropriate manner”, and shouted at him on at least two occasions. The supervisor “repeatedly singled out and treated plaintiff differently than similarly situated patent examiners who were younger”, the complaint said.
As a result of his supervisor’s behaviour, Nyimpha “became highly stressed, highly emotional, and lost the ability to sleep”, while his productivity declined.
However, in a memorandum accompanying the USPTO’s motion for summary judgment, the agency claimed that Nyimpha’s “struggle and ultimate failure to meet the USPTO’s performance expectations is well documented in an extensive record”.
“Despite overwhelming proof of his performance issues, and without any support in the record that his alleged treatment at the USPTO was based on anything other than these issues, plaintiff claims that he was subject to a hostile work environment and discriminatory termination of his employment,” said the office, adding that all of the former patent examiner’s claims lacked merit.
Siding with the USPTO, Ellis granted the USPTO’s motion for summary judgment after finding that Nyimpha’s claim of differential treatment rests on “conclusory statements” that are not supported by evidence.
“Here, as plaintiff has conceded, there is no evidence that anyone at the USPTO made a negative comment about plaintiff’s race or age,” said the judge. “Plaintiff has not presented specific evidence to show that any of the alleged conduct was based on plaintiff’s race or age.”
Did you enjoy reading this story? Sign up to our free daily newsletters and get stories sent like this straight to your inbox.
Today's top stories:
Ohio jury hits Dentons with ‘record’ $32m legal malpractice verdict
Domain traders urge SCOTUS to protect ‘generic’ domains
Harry and Meghan should ‘do the right thing’ and withdraw TMs
