1. Whether courts may affirm summary judgment in a Title VII case by discounting sworn testimony, drawing inferences in the employer's favor, and treating the employer's explanation as controlling, contrary to Tolan v. Cotton, 572 U.S. 650 (2014), Anderson v. Liberty Lobby, Inc., 477 U.S. 242 (1986), and Reeves v. Sanderson Plumbing Products, Inc., 530 U.S. 133 (2000).

2. Whether a Title VII plaintiff may be denied a prima facie case solely for lack of a "nearly identical" comparator when the plaintiff offers other evidence supporting an inference of discrimination, contrary to McDonnell Douglas Corp. v. Green, 411 U.S. 792 (1973), Furnco Construction Corp. v. Waters, 438 U.S. 567 (1978), and Texas Department of Community Affairs v. Burdine, 450 U.S. 248 (1981).

Whether courts may affirm summary judgment in Title VII employment discrimination cases by discounting sworn testimony and drawing inferences in the employer's favor contrary to established precedent, and whether a Title VII plaintiff may be denied a prima facie case solely for lack of a nearly identical comparator when other evidence supports an inference of discrimination