Roty v. Battelle Mem. Inst.

# Roty v. Battelle Memorial Institute – Plain Language Summary **What Happened** Roty and other employees sued Battelle Memorial Institute, claiming they were unfairly laid off in 2013 because of their age. They presented statistical evidence arguing that older workers were targeted during the company's reduction in force. **What the Court Decided** A jury sided with Battelle, voting 6-2 that the company did not discriminate based on age. An appeals court upheld this decision. The appeals court found that the trial judge properly rejected the workers' statistical evidence because it didn't account for other factors that might explain why certain employees were laid off. The court also upheld the judge's decision to exclude late-filed requests for company documents. **Why This Matters for Workers** This case shows that simply presenting statistics showing older workers were laid off isn't enough to win an age discrimination case. Workers must provide strong evidence proving age was the actual reason for termination, not other business factors. Additionally, meeting legal deadlines for submitting evidence and paperwork is critical—missing deadlines can result in evidence being excluded from consideration.