Danny Jones v. Thomas Vilsack, 20-5821

Background

Danny Jones, an African American Soil Conservationist with the USDA NRCS, faced a 2005 allegation by co-worker Lori Pittman that he exposed himself; an internal investigation was inconclusive.
Jones sued Pittman for slander and filed EEO complaints; Pittman later filed an EEO complaint requesting not to work with Jones.
The Agency temporarily reassigned Jones to Nashville during a second investigation, later permanently reassigned him to Nashville, and later reassigned his position within Nashville.
Jones sought reasonable accommodations (work from home, windowed workspace, noise‑cancelling headphones); some requests were delayed, partially denied, then later one was approved after additional documentation.
Administrative EEO processes dismissed Jones’s complaints; he sued under Title VII (retaliation, race discrimination) and the Rehabilitation Act (failure to accommodate).
The district court granted summary judgment for the Agency; Jones appealed four retaliation claims and the Sixth Circuit affirmed.

Issues

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
1) Second investigation and temporary reassignment to Nashville	Jones: Agency encouraged Pittman to file a new EEO complaint to retaliate for his prior EEO suit and federal lawsuit.	Agency: Pittman independently filed an EEO complaint alleging harassment, which legitimately prompted investigation and temporary relocation.	Held: No causation — Pittman’s complaint was an intervening, legitimate reason; Jones failed to show but‑for causation.
2) Delay in acting on reasonable accommodation request	Jones: Delay (and partial denials) were retaliatory for his prior EEO filings.	Agency: Request was verbal and misunderstood, supervisor unaware; Agency promptly investigated once informed and required additional medical documentation; delay not causally linked.	Held: Forfeited some theories; in any event no temporal proximity or other evidence of causation — no prima facie retaliation.
3) Permanent reassignment to Nashville	Jones: Permanent move was retaliation for earlier EEO activity.	Agency: Significant time elapsed between protected activity and reassignment; contemporaneous recommendation to separate Jones and Pittman provided a legitimate, nonretaliatory reason.	Held: No causation — long time gap and intervening legitimate reason defeated claim.
4) Later lateral reassignment within Nashville (different Soil Conservationist duties) — pretext	Jones: Reassignment was culmination of a multi‑year scheme to take his job; Agency’s stated reasons were pretextual.	Agency: Reorganization created a vacancy; Jones had requisite experience and was reassigned to fill the need; practice of similar reassignments shown.	Held: Agency offered legitimate nonretaliatory reasons; Jones failed to raise a genuine dispute of material fact that those reasons were pretextual.

Key Cases Cited

Abbott v. Crown Motor Co., Inc., 348 F.3d 537 (6th Cir. 2003) (elements of Title VII retaliation prima facie case)
McDonnell Douglas Corp. v. Green, 411 U.S. 792 (U.S. 1973) (burden‑shifting framework for employment discrimination claims)
Univ. of Texas S.W. Med. Ctr. v. Nassar, 570 U.S. 338 (U.S. 2013) (retaliation requires but‑for causation)
Kenney v. Aspen Techs., Inc., 965 F.3d 443 (6th Cir. 2020) (temporal proximity and intervening causes in causation analysis)
Kuhn v. Washtenaw County, 709 F.3d 612 (6th Cir. 2013) (intervening events can defeat causation)
Wasek v. Arrow Energy Servs., 682 F.3d 463 (6th Cir. 2012) (decision to leave work site as intervening event)
Imwalle v. Reliance Med. Prods., Inc., 515 F.3d 531 (6th Cir. 2008) (temporal proximity as a factor in causation)
Cooper v. City of North Olmsted, 795 F.2d 1265 (6th Cir. 1986) (multi‑month delay insufficient, alone, to show causation)
Hubbell v. FedEx SmartPost, Inc., 933 F.3d 558 (6th Cir. 2019) (plaintiff’s burden to show employer’s reasons were pretext for retaliation)
Tingle v. Arbors at Hilliard, 692 F.3d 523 (6th Cir. 2012) (pretext requires showing proffered reasons were untrue or insufficient)