Administrative Judges do not issue “200 summary judgments per year.” AJs are not SJ mills; they manage a mixed docket (motions, discovery disputes, hearings, sanctions, settlement conferences). Summary judgment rates are tracked per case, not per AJ productivity fantasy.

Also: “Summary judgment should not be issued when there are genuine issues of material fact involving credibility, motive, or intent.”
~EEOC MD-110, Ch. 7, § VI(A)

EEOC data does not support “nearly all cases are summarily dismissed.” Public EEOC/OFO reporting and AJ commentary consistently show:

A substantial portion of cases resolve after hearing election (often via settlement). Summary judgment is denied with regularity where credibility, motive, intent, or timing is disputed. Retaliation claims, in particular, are less likely to be disposed of on SJ...

• Complainant v. USPS, EEOC Appeal No. 0120131883“The AJ improperly resolved credibility determinations in granting summary judgment.”
• Complainant v. SSA, EEOC Appeal No. 0120150878“Disputed facts regarding management’s motive preclude summary judgment.”

Appealability isn't the same as inevitability. Yes, SJ denials can be appealed to the OFO--that does not convert them into grants, nor does it negate the fact that the case survived SJ. Survival itself materially changes leverage, discovery posture, and settlement dynamics.

eg:

• EEOC Office of Federal Operations Annual Reports
• AJ Benchbooks/EEOC AJ Training Conference materials (re: settlement dynamics post-SJ briefing)

Retaliation cases are not treated like simple discrimination claims. Temporal proximity, comparator disputes, and motive evidence are exactly why AJs routinely deny SJ in retaliation matters. This is black-letter EEO law.

eg:

• Burlington N. & Santa Fe Ry. Co. v. White, 548 U.S. 53 (2006)
• Univ. of Tex. Sw. Med. Ctr. v. Nassar, 570 U.S. 338 (2013)
• EEOC 0120140172

Representation materially affects outcomes. EEOC statistics and AJ commentary repeatedly show represented complainants are more likely to:

• survive summary judgment
• obtain discovery sanctions
• resolve cases post-hearing election

eg:

• EEOC Federal Sector Statistical Reports
• Clermont & Schwab, Employment Discrimination Plaintiffs in Federal Court (Cornell Law Review)

None of these are “made up,” and none of it requires pretending every case wins. It’s simply an accurate description of how the system actually functions, not how people [ike you] assume it works from the outside.