Whether comparator evidence can support an inference of discrimination if the plaintiff and comparators do not share the same position, duties, and supervisor

QUESTIONS PRESENTED A jury returned a verdict for petitioner on her age discrimination and retaliation claims. The district court upheld the verdict, finding that a reasonable jury could infer discrimination and retaliation from the evidence presented. The First Circuit reversed, holding as a matter of law that petitioner’s comparator evidence had no probative value because the comparators had different positions, duties, and supervisors. The court further held that, without more, a jury’s disbelief of an employer’s explanation for an adverse employment action cannot support an inference of discrimination or retaliation. The questions presented are — 1. Whether comparator evidence can support an inference of discrimination if the plaintiff and comparators do not share the same position, duties, and supervisor. 2. Whether a jury’s disbelief of an employer’s proffered reason for an adverse employment action can sustain an inference of discrimination or retaliation.