18th Annual Workplace Class Action Report - 2022 Edition

Annual Workplace Class Action Litigation Report: 2022 Edition 69 purportedly legitimate basis for the pay differential. Specifically, the Court held that it was particularly significant that there was evidence that Defendant increased male professor’s salaries to close the gap between their salaries and those of comparable female professors and did not increase Davidson-Schmich’s salary to close the gap between her and Koger. For these reasons, the Court denied Defendant’s motion for summary judgment as to the EPA and Title VII claims. As to the EEOC’s motion for summary judgment on Defendant’s affirmative defenses of failure to conciliate, laches, and failure to mitigate, the Court granted summary judgment in favor of the EEOC as to Defendant’s affirmative defenses of failure to conciliate and laches. However, the Court denied the EEOC’s motion as to the defense of failure to mitigate. In sum, the Court denied Defendant’s motion for summary judgment and granted the EEOC’s motion for partial summary judgment in part. (xii) District Of Columbia Circuit No reported decisions.