1. Whether the Summary judgment in McDaniel's retaliation claim was proper because District Court Judge Dorsey stated that McDaniel failed to raise a genuine dispute of material fact as to whether defendant's legitimate, non-retaliatory reason for not hiring McDaniel was pretextual and unworthy of belief.

2. Whether management failed to adhere to Title VII retaliation provision and similarly worded statues requiring a plaintiff to prove but for causation (i.e. that an employer would not have taken an adverse employment action but for an improper motive) or instead require only prove that the employer had a mix motive (i.e. that an improper motive was one of multiple reasons for employment action).

3. Whether management directly violated Title V Prohibited Personnel Practices specifically Title 5 2302, Subsection (b) (4) states in part (management must not) deceive or willfully obstruct any person's right to compete for employment directly violated . And Title 5 2302, Subsection (b) (6) states in part (Management must not) grant any preference or advantage not authorized by law, rule, or regulation to any employee or applicant for employment.

Whether the summary judgment in McDaniel's retaliation claim was proper