Mark Charlton-Perkins v. Univ. of Cincinnati, 35 F.4th 1053

In 2017–18 the University of Cincinnati Department of Biological Sciences ran a faculty search; a committee shortlisted candidates and voted; Charlton-Perkins (male) was the committee’s top choice.
Department chair and dean decided to prioritize female candidates and later informed the committee they would hire two candidates; the dean then announced the entire search was cancelled.
Charlton-Perkins alleges UC refused to hire him because of his gender and cancelled the search as a pretext to conceal discrimination. He sued under Title IX (against UC) and 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (against university officials), seeking damages and reinstatement or front pay.
Defendants moved to dismiss for lack of Article III jurisdiction and for failure to state a claim, arguing the claims were unripe and that no adverse employment action occurred because the position was never filled.
The district court dismissed for lack of subject-matter jurisdiction; the Sixth Circuit reversed, holding Charlton-Perkins alleged a completed, concrete injury and plausibly pleaded discrimination and a pretextual cancellation.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Article III standing / ripeness (completed past denial)	Denial of the position is a concrete, completed injury sufficient for standing; ripeness is met.	No concrete harm until another person is hired; cancellation made claim speculative and unripe.	Standing exists: the past denial is a concrete injury and ripeness is not a barrier.
Requirement that a third party be hired to show adverse action	Not required where employer cancels the search as a pretext to avoid hiring the plaintiff.	Plaintiff must show a similarly situated non-protected person was hired.	Cancellation can be part of a discriminatory scheme; plaintiff need not show someone else was hired where cancellation is alleged as pretext.
Pleading standard (must plead McDonnell Douglas prima facie elements?)	Need only plead plausible facts showing discrimination; not required to plead a full prima facie case.	Plaintiff failed to plead essential elements of a prima facie case (e.g., someone else was hired).	McDonnell Douglas is an evidentiary framework, not a pleading requirement; complaint plausibly alleges discrimination.
Immunity and other affirmative defenses	Plaintiff seeks damages and reinstatement; asserts actionable claims.	Raised sovereign and qualified immunity defenses.	Court did not resolve immunity issues; remanded for the district court to consider those defenses in the first instance.

Gelboim v. Bank of Am. Corp., 574 U.S. 405 (jurisdiction over final decisions on appeals)
Lujan v. Defenders of Wildlife, 504 U.S. 555 (standing: injury-in-fact, causation, redressability)
Spokeo, Inc. v. Robins, 578 U.S. 330 (concrete and particularized injury requirement)
McDonnell Douglas Corp. v. Green, 411 U.S. 792 (framework for proving discrimination at trial)
Swierkewicz v. Sorema N.A., 534 U.S. 506 (McDonnell Douglas is an evidentiary, not pleading, requirement)
Burlington Indus., Inc. v. Ellerth, 524 U.S. 742 (definition of materially adverse employment action)
Reeves v. Tenn. Farmers Mut. Ins. Co., [citation="555 F. App'x 509"] (6th Cir.) (distinguishable: offer rescinded and process rerun)
Steel Co. v. Citizens for a Better Env't, 523 U.S. 83 (jurisdiction vs. merits separation)
Young v. United Parcel Serv., Inc., 575 U.S. 206 (prima facie requirements may vary by context)