Dass v. Chicago Board of Education, 2012 U.S. App. LEXIS 7373

Dass, an Indian-born teacher, was non-renewed for the 2007-2008 year after a 2005-2006 evaluation period and disputed the decision as national-origin discrimination under Title VII and §1981.
Dass returned from medical leave in Nov. 2006 and was assigned to a seventh-grade class despite an open third-grade position.
Jeske, the Casals principal, had previously opposed Dass’s rehiring and had numerous documented evaluations highlighting discipline problems.
Dass contends that Jeske’s actions—statement about North Side, opposition to her grievance, open seventh-grade assignment, and triple classroom observations—form a direct-discrimination mosaic.
The district court granted summary judgment on the federal claims; the Seventh Circuit affirmed, holding no adverse action from the seventh-grade reassignment and insufficient mosaic evidence of discrimination.
Dass therefore only prevailed, if at all, on non-renewal, which the court treated as the actual adverse action; the mosaic evidence tied to the direct-method claim was not enough to defeat summary judgment.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether the seventh-grade assignment is an adverse action	Dass asserts reassignment worsened her conditions and career prospects.	Defendants argue it was not materially adverse and did not impair career prospects.	Not a materially adverse action; only non-renewal was conclusively adverse.
Whether a mosaic of circumstantial evidence shows discrimination	Dass argues four circumstantial pieces prove discrimination.	Circumstantial evidence fails to point directly to national-origin discrimination.	No direct nexus; mosaic evidence insufficient for direct-method defeat of summary judgment.
Whether the non-renewal was motivated by national origin	Dass claims non-renewal stemmed from national-origin bias.	Discipline problems and classroom management, not origin, drove non-renewal.	Non-renewal supported by evidence of inability to manage class; not proven as discriminatory motive.
Whether the district court correctly applied direct vs indirect method	Dass abandoned indirect method and proceeded on direct method.	Even under direct method, must show an adverse action with discriminatory motive.	Direct-method analysis affirmed; no genuine issue of material fact as to discrimination.

Lucero v. Nettle Creek Sch. Corp., 566 F.3d 720 (7th Cir. 2009) (reassignment not automatically adverse; requires material change in terms or career impact)
Diaz v. Kraft Foods Global, Inc., 653 F.3d 582 (7th Cir. 2011) (direct evidence threshold and mosaic considerations for direct method)
Adams v. Wal-Mart Stores, Inc., 324 F.3d 935 (7th Cir. 2003) (circumstantial evidence must point directly to a discriminatory reason)
Petts v. Rockledge Furniture LLC, 534 F.3d 715 (7th Cir. 2008) (factors for mosaic of discrimination; contemporaneity considerations)