NONPRECEDENTIAL DISPOSITION To be cited only in accordance with Fed. R. App. P. 32.1 United States Court of Appeals For the Seventh Circuit Chicago, Illinois 60604 Submitted October 15, 2020* Decided November 19, 2020 Before JOEL M. FLAUM, Circuit Judge ILANA DIAMOND ROVNER, Circuit Judge MICHAEL Y. SCUDDER, Circuit Judge No. 20-1397 VINCENZA PRESTI, Appeal from the United States District Plaintiff-Appellant, Court for the Northern District of Illinois, Eastern Division. v. No. 18 C 1710 CHAD F. WOLF, Acting Secretary of the Virginia M. Kendall, U.S. Department of Homeland Security, Judge. Defendant-Appellee. ORDER Vincenza Presti, an immigration officer at the United States Citizenship and Immigration Services, believes that she was demoted and given negative feedback on her job performance based on her Italian descent and in retaliation for complaints she had filed with the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission. She sued the Secretary * We have agreed to decide the case without oral argument because the briefs and record adequately present the facts and legal arguments, and oral argument would not significantly aid the court. FED. R. APP. P. 34(a)(2)(C). No. 20-1397 Page 2 of Homeland Security under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, 42 U.S.C. § 2000e- 2. The district court entered summary judgment for the defendant, concluding that no reasonable jury could find that USCIS’s employment decisions were discriminatory or retaliatory. We affirm. Presti joined USCIS in 2002 as an immigration officer. Over the next eleven years, she filed two complaints with the EEOC about discrimination on the job. In her first complaint, in 2008, she stated that she had been passed over for a role because of her Italian heritage. The EEOC made a finding of discrimination, and USCIS offered her the job she sought. The second, in 2013, concerned feedback in her annual review. That complaint was settled through mediation. In 2015, Presti’s supervisor gave her some more negative feedback in an otherwise positive annual performance review. He wrote that Presti came across as confrontational and demanding and needed to work on her communication, but he also favorably graded her overall score as 4.4 out of a possible 5 points, placing her in the category of “exceeding expectations.” Presti objected to the comments about her communication style, which she defended as “open,” “direct,” and rooted in her Italian background and culture. Management edited the written feedback so that she and the supervisor approved of it. Around this time, Presti applied for a promotion to Level III Immigration Officer. Applicants were scored based on their interview performance and references, and the two applicants with the highest scores were promoted. Presti’s total score was the fifth highest of the seven candidates. Presti then filed a new EEOC complaint stating that she received negative feedback and was passed over for promotion based on her Italian descent. The EEOC found the charges unsupported. In March 2018, Presti applied to be a Supervisory Immigration Services Officer. At the time, she already was serving as a supervisor in a temporary ...
Original document
Source: All recent Immigration Decisions In All the U.S. Courts of Appeals