/f3d/914/0480-01 · neov2 explore

United States Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit, en banc · 2019-01-23

Case and law context

Role: applied; posture: en banc appeal from dismissal of an ADEA disparate-impact applicant claim; 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/914/0480-01 — United States Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit, en banc · 2019	Judicial outside-applicant coverage limit where circuit precedent controls	satisfied Counted merits instance applied / merits basis: law The Seventh Circuit en banc majority applies its employee-only reading to an outside applicant’s subsection (a)(2) disparate-impact claim; no result on a subsection (a)(1) treatment claim is inferred.	applicant/outside-employee-impact-coverage	After Dale Kleber unsuccessfully applied for a job at CareFusion Corporation Source: `docroot/ir/caselaw/f3d_914.jsonl#/f3d/914/0480-01`; Unicode character offsets [24:100] (end exclusive); SHA-256 `30d2e13ce22f23a8cd68b23cbe5a9996abaa1d484ea89b0fe0d5b6469402b2a1`. Evidence kind: fact; polarity: supports; absent flag: 0; quoted-rule flag: 0 (1 = tagged; 0 = not tagged) By its terms, § 4(a)(2) proscribes certain conduct by employers and limits its protection to employees. Source: `docroot/ir/caselaw/f3d_914.jsonl#/f3d/914/0480-01`; Unicode character offsets [2643:2746] (end exclusive); SHA-256 `30d2e13ce22f23a8cd68b23cbe5a9996abaa1d484ea89b0fe0d5b6469402b2a1`. Evidence kind: held; polarity: not recorded; absent flag: 0; quoted-rule flag: 0 (1 = tagged; 0 = not tagged)

Court interpretations recorded from this case

interpretation

By its terms, § 4(a)(2) proscribes certain conduct by employers and limits its protection to employees.

/f3d/914/0480-01 — United States Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit, en banc · 2019

By its terms, § 4(a)(2) proscribes certain conduct by employers and limits its protection to employees.

Source: docroot/ir/caselaw/f3d_914.jsonl#/f3d/914/0480-01; Unicode character offsets [2643:2746] (end exclusive); SHA-256 30d2e13ce22f23a8cd68b23cbe5a9996abaa1d484ea89b0fe0d5b6469402b2a1.

Kleber en banc (7th Cir. 2019) excludes outside applicants from §623(a)(2), consistent with the Eleventh Circuit; §623(a)(1) treatment claims for applicants remain available. This jurisdiction-sensitive boundary is part of neutral-practice coverage, not a bar to all ADEA hiring claims.