The Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals recently upheld a lower court's decision to dismiss a discrimination lawsuit filed by Duy Dihn Do against Comcast Cable Communications Management, LLC. This ruling, issued on October 20, 2026, affects workplace rights and the interpretation of laws related to discrimination and retaliation in employment. Do alleged violations under Title VII and Section 1981, but the court found his claims insufficient.
Duy Dihn Do was terminated from his position at Comcast in January 2023. Following his termination, he filed a lawsuit claiming discrimination and retaliation based on sex under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act, as well as discrimination and retaliation based on race and ethnicity under Section 1981. He also alleged interference and retaliation under the Family and Medical Leave Act (FMLA). The case was filed in the Southern District of Texas, where the initial proceedings took place.
The dispute escalated when the district court dismissed Do's Title VII claim. Do did not object to this dismissal, leading him to revise his complaint to focus solely on the Section 1981 and FMLA claims. Later, he sought to amend his complaint to include a new claim for witness retaliation under Title VII and the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA), but the district court denied this request. Comcast subsequently filed a motion for summary judgment, which the district court granted, resulting in a final judgment in favor of Comcast.
In its ruling, the Fifth Circuit affirmed the district court's decision. The court noted that Do had argued he established a prima facie case of retaliation under Title VII's participation clause. However, the court pointed out that Do did not address his Section 1981 claim or how it connected to his Title VII claim. Additionally, he failed to mention his FMLA claim, leading the court to conclude that these claims were forfeited. The court stated, "This court does not address issues not raised in the district court, let alone issues that were voluntarily dismissed."
The ruling was issued per curiam, meaning it was delivered by the court collectively rather than by a single judge. The panel included Circuit Judges Jones, Ho, and Wilson. The court's decision reinforces the importance of addressing all claims and arguments at the district court level, as failure to do so can result in forfeiture on appeal.
This ruling has significant implications for employees who may face discrimination or retaliation in the workplace. It emphasizes the necessity for plaintiffs to clearly articulate their claims and ensure that all relevant arguments are presented in the initial stages of litigation. The court's decision also serves as a reminder that voluntary dismissals can limit a plaintiff's ability to pursue related claims later in the process.
Looking ahead, this ruling may influence how future discrimination and retaliation cases are handled in the Fifth Circuit. Employees who believe they have been wronged may need to be more vigilant in presenting their claims and ensuring that all arguments are thoroughly explored in the lower courts. The ruling does not set a new legal precedent but reinforces existing standards regarding the presentation of claims in employment discrimination cases.
As for the possibility of an appeal, the court's ruling is final unless there are grounds for further legal action. Details were not available in the court filing regarding any related cases or potential appeals. However, Do's options may be limited given the court's clear affirmation of the lower court's judgment.