whether-a-plaintiff-has-to-name-similarly-situated-employees-or-present-circumstantial-evidence-of-discriminatory-intent

QUESTIONS PRESENTED FOR REVIEW . 1. Whether the Court should resolve the following question for which the circuit courts of appeals are split: for his/her claim of wrongful termination for alleged violation of employer’s policy to survive summary judgment motion, whether a plaintiff has to name similarly situated employee(s) who had nearly identical job responsibilities, shared the same supervisor, and committed nearly identical policy violations, or present “circumstantial evidence that creates a triable issue concerning the employer’s discriminatory intent”. 2. Whether Respondents violated Petitioner’s due process right guaranteed by the Fourteenth Amendment by disregarding employer's own policy to label Petitioner as “not eligible for rehire” due to misconduct . “demonstrating unfitness for employment”, for which the circuit courts of appeals are split in terms of how to define a stigma that infringes liberty interest and what constitutes the publication of the stigma. (b) LISTS OF ALL PARTIES AND PROCEEDINGS _ Parties involved The caption of the case contains the names of all parties. Respondents were represented by counsel Rola Daaboul. Proceedings Wei-ping Zeng v. Texas Tech University Health Science Center at El Paso; Peter Rotwein; Richard A. Lange; Beverley Court; Rebecca Salcido, No. 20-50210 (5th Cir. December 15, 2020) Wei-ping Zeng v. Texas Tech University Health Science Center at El Paso; Peter Rotwein; Richard A. Lange; Beverley Court; Rebecca Salcido, No. 20-50210 (5th Cir. November 9, 2020) Wei-ping Zeng v. Texas Tech University Health Science Center at E] Paso; Peter Rotwein; Richard A. Lange; Beverley Court; Rebecca Salcido, No. 3:19-cv00099-KC (TXW_USDC, March 4, 2020). iv (c) TABLES OF CONTENTS AND AUTHORITIES