467 F. App'x 685
9th Cir.2012Background
- Doe alleges UOP violated Title IX by deliberate indifference and retaliation after sexual assault by three UOP players.
- District court granted summary judgment for UOP; Ninth Circuit affirms.
- Deliberate indifference requires knowledge by an official with authority and a clearly unreasonable response under the circumstances.
- Belcher suspected a link to an April 2008 rape but there was only a general description and no actual knowledge; police did not pursue.
- Hearing Board punished attackers (one expelled, two suspended; required training; no direct contact with Doe; transcripts reflect suspensions).
- Retaliation claim requires showing motive to retaliate for a complaint; district court excludes certain evidence as hearsay and finds no pretextual retaliatory motive.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Did UOP act with deliberate indifference to prior rape risk? | Doe argues Belcher's link created knowledge; risk increased. | Belcher's suspicion was too tenuous; no knowledge. | No clear unreasonable response; no deliberate indifference. |
| Was UOP's handling of the 2010 assault clearly unreasonable? | UOP should have expelled all assailants; otherwise ongoing harassment. | Disciplinary actions imposed; not clearly unreasonable. | Not clearly unreasonable; disciplined outcomes upheld. |
| Did UOP retaliate against Doe for reporting discrimination? | Stay-away directive shows retaliatory motive. | No evidence of authorization or retaliation; motive not shown. | No retaliation proven; summary judgment proper. |
Key Cases Cited
- Gebser v. Lago Vista Indep. Sch. Dist., 524 U.S. 274 (U.S. 1998) (deliberate indifference standard in Title IX claims)
- Oden v. N. Marianas Coll., 440 F.3d 1085 (9th Cir. 2006) (clear-unreasonable standard for responses to harassment)
- Davis v. Monroe Cnty. Bd. of Educ., 526 U.S. 629 (U.S. 1999) (summary judgment based on response not clearly unreasonable)
- Nelson v. Pima Cmty. Coll., 83 F.3d 1075 (9th Cir. 1996) (inadmissible evidence cannot create factual dispute for summary judgment)
- Jackson v. Birmingham Bd. of Educ., 544 U.S. 167 (U.S. 2005) (retaliation element requires causal link to complaint of discrimination)