Whether the lower court relied on demonstrably false information, submitted by Tufts University to reject Dr. Melissa Ing's retaliation and gender discrimination claims, subsequent to sexual harassment and patient safety whistleblowing reporting

QUESTIONS PRESENTED ; Petitioner Dr. Melissa Ing is a highly talented dental educational leader, researcher, and author. She was denied promotion to full professor because she reported sexual harassment of an accused serial sexual harasser. Respondent Tufts University claims Petitioner was unworthy and that retaliation and : discrimination played no roles in Respondent’s decision, but this position ignores demonstrably false information and critical evidence. The imposition of a protective order violated 20 U.S.C. § 1681-1688 Title IX law due to mandatory requirements to report unlawful sexual . harassment, retaliation and discrimination. The lower court excluded critically important evidence which : caused the courts to rule against Petitioner unjustly. ‘ The Questions Presented Are: ‘ ; 1. Whether the lower court relied on demonstrably false information, submitted by Tufts University to reject Dr. Melissa Ing’s retaliation and gender discrimination claims, subsequent to sexual harassment and patient safety whistleblowing reporting. (18 U.S.C. . § 1001 and 18 U.S.C. § 1621) 2. Whether the lower court failed to utilize critical evidence demonstrating that Dr. Ing pled retaliation and disparate treatment subsequent to sexual harassment and patient safety whistleblowing reporting. 3. Whether the lower court improperly applied the laws 42 U.S.C. § 2000e, 20 U.S.C. § 1681 and M.G.L. Ch. 151B. ii :