/f3d/934/0447-01

Coverage and quality

1 annotation blocks; 1 merits instance blocks; 1 distinct cases with counted merits instances; 0 excluded blocks.

Frozen DB: 165 case–law contexts. Source tree: 300 CASE files. This snapshot does not imply full current repository coverage.

Legal review status: unavailable to this view.

Counting rules and source integrity

Counted instances require applied citation role, merits scope, and a reached holding. Procedural, not-reached, comparator, and other context remains visible but is excluded from counts.

Source hash and exact-offset checks verify quotation integrity only; they do not establish legal correctness, model confidence, exhaustive coverage, or approval. Zero means no counted annotation in this snapshot.

Database snapshot SHA-256: b8882353247abdd6e20d4e22922c166d68ccb8e2da50e13e0162a35c316318f8. 3301 source quotations verified across this snapshot.

United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 2019-08-13

Original case on neochart.com

Case and law context

29 U.S.C. §§ 621–634

Role: applied; posture: appeal from summary judgment for employer; result: claimant-lost; claim:

Instances and excluded annotation blocks

Annotation blocks, including explicitly excluded context
Case	Element	Holding and scope	Variant	Exact source quotations
/f3d/934/0447-01 — United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 2019	Judicial but-for standard for age-based treatment	not Counted merits instance applied / merits basis: no-evidence The employer’s reduction in force does not automatically defeat an age claim. The selected evidence addresses the remark’s context and lack of connection to the decisionmaker.	reduction-in-force/retirement-reference-without-decision-link	Between 2014 and 2018, the defendants, Transocean Offshore Deepwater et al., reduced their offshore fleet by 59%. Source: `docroot/ir/caselaw/f3d_934.jsonl#/f3d/934/0447-01`; Unicode character offsets [30:143] (end exclusive); SHA-256 `62ed31abd3cdc9f89edbacbe3cc8eec107e92aa53ae9b66a666acec6dbb84908`. Evidence kind: fact; polarity: cuts-against; absent flag: 0; quoted-rule flag: 0 (1 = tagged; 0 = not tagged) And no other evidence shows, or even suggests, that Owen had any influence over the decision to terminate McMichael. Source: `docroot/ir/caselaw/f3d_934.jsonl#/f3d/934/0447-01`; Unicode character offsets [20860:20976] (end exclusive); SHA-256 `62ed31abd3cdc9f89edbacbe3cc8eec107e92aa53ae9b66a666acec6dbb84908`. Evidence kind: fact; polarity: cuts-against; absent flag: 1; quoted-rule flag: 0 (1 = tagged; 0 = not tagged) Because we agree that McMichael failed to raise a genuine issue of material fact, we AFFIRM. Source: `docroot/ir/caselaw/f3d_934.jsonl#/f3d/934/0447-01`; Unicode character offsets [893:985] (end exclusive); SHA-256 `62ed31abd3cdc9f89edbacbe3cc8eec107e92aa53ae9b66a666acec6dbb84908`. Evidence kind: held; polarity: not recorded; absent flag: 0; quoted-rule flag: 0 (1 = tagged; 0 = not tagged)

Court interpretations recorded from this case