Cases — June 5th through 11th
Discrimination/Retaliation
*Moore v. Philips Electronics North America Corporation (10th Cir., June 6, 2016) (affirming summary judgement in favor of Philips on Moore’s race discrimination and retaliatory discharge claims since Philips’ reason for the discharge was not pretextual)
ERISA and Employee Pension Plans
*Jenkins-Dyer v. Exxon Mobil Corporation (10th Cir., June 6, 2016) (affirming summary judgment in favor of Exxon Mobil as Jenkins-Dyer was not a named beneficiary)
Miscellaneous
*Mahalaxmi Amba Jewelers v. Johnson (10th Cir.,
*Moore v. Philips Electronics North America Corporation (10th Cir., June 6, 2016) (affirming summary judgement in favor of Philips on Moore’s race discrimination and retaliatory discharge claims since Philips’ reason for the discharge was not pretextual)
ERISA and Employee Pension Plans
*Jenkins-Dyer v. Exxon Mobil Corporation (10th Cir., June 6, 2016) (affirming summary judgment in favor of Exxon Mobil as Jenkins-Dyer was not a named beneficiary)
Miscellaneous
*Mahalaxmi Amba Jewelers v. Johnson (10th Cir.,
June 10, 2016) (affirming Immigration Services refusal to classify owner as a multinational executive or manager over Karats, Inc. (U.S. employer), because of foreign employer Mahalaxmi’s failure to establish that Mahalaxmi and Karats are “affiliates”)
*Cases marked with an asterisk are cases the 10th Circuit does not consider binding precedent except under the doctrines of law of the case, res judicata, or collateral estoppel. They may be cited, however, for persuasive value under Fed.R.App.P. 32.1 and 10th Cir.R. 32.1.