No. 25-5966

Mally Gage v. Mayo Clinic, et al.

Lower Court: Ninth Circuit
Docketed: 2025-10-27
Status: Denied
Type: IFP
Response WaivedIFP
Tags: civil-rights-act due-process motion-to-dismiss pro-se-litigant religious-accommodation title-vii
Key Terms:
DueProcess EmploymentDiscrimina
Latest Conference: 2025-12-05
Question Presented (AI Summary)

Whether employers can demand statements of apostasy and restrict religious communication under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and whether pro se litigants must use specific language to overcome a motion to dismiss under the Due Process Clause

Question Presented (OCR Extract)

1) Under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, can employers demand statements of apostasy as well as set restrictions on how an employee can communicate their religious beliefs or accommodation needs as a condition of employment? 2) Under the Due Process Clause and this Court ’s precedents, what magic words are needed to overcome a motion to dismiss for a pro se litigant?

Docket Entries

2025-12-08
Petition DENIED.
2025-11-13
DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 12/5/2025.
2025-11-06
Waiver of right of respondent Mayo Clinic, et al. to respond filed.
2025-10-14
Petition for a writ of certiorari and motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis filed. (Response due November 26, 2025)

Attorneys

Mally Gage
Mally Gage — Petitioner
Mally Gage — Petitioner
Mayo Clinic, et al.
Amelia Anne McDermottLittler Mendelson, P.C., Respondent
Amelia Anne McDermottLittler Mendelson, P.C., Respondent