USCA1 Opinion

October 12, 1994

[NOT FOR PUBLICATION]

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FIRST CIRCUIT
____________________

Nos. 93-2051
93-2234
94-1589
J. DOE,
Plaintiff, Appellant,
v.
HARVARD UNIVERSITY,
Defendant, Appellee.
____________________
APPEAL FROM THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF MASSACHUSETTS
[Hon. Edward F. Harrington, U.S. District Judge]
___________________
____________________
Before
Selya, Cyr and Stahl,
Circuit Judges.
______________

____________________

J. Doe on brief pro se.

______
Eileen M. Hagerty, Kern, Hagerty, Roach & Carpenter on brief
_________________ _________________________________
appellee.
Margaret H. Marshall and Kathleen B. Rogers, Office of Gene
_____________________
___________________
Counsel Harvard University, on brief for appellee.
____________________

____________________

Per Curiam.
__________

Appellant J. Doe,

the Extension School of

complaint

in

discriminated

a student suspended from

appellee Harvard University, filed a

June

1993

against

by

alleging
Harvard

that
because

she
of

had
a

been

learning

disability

from which

violations of the

she suffers.

Civil Rights

Her

complaint alleged

Act, 42 U.S.C.

Individuals with Disabilities Act

[IDEA], 20 U.S.C.

1485, the Rehabilitation Act, 29 U.S.C.

Americans with
12213.

Disabilities Act

refrain from
time,

injunction

1400-

701-797b, and the

[ADA], 42 U.S.C.

12101-

to

reinstate her

other alleged acts

Doe

also

seeking

filed

similar

as

a student

Rights

Act

and the

IDEA

motion

for

relief.

The

and granted

Harvard on the remaining counts.

request

for a

court denied

and

of discrimination.
a

to

At the

preliminary

district

dismissed the parts of the complaint predicated on

the

the

She sought injunctive relief in the form of an order

compelling Harvard

same

1983,

summary

court

the Civil
judgment to

The court also denied Doe's

preliminary injunction.

Later

the district

Doe's motion for reconsideration.

Doe appeals

dismissal

reconsideration

of her
and

preliminary injunction.
district

court

judge

reviewed

carefully the

case, the
the

denial

denial

of

of her

her

motion for

request

for

She also appeals the refusal by

to

recuse

record

himself.

in this

After

case, the

briefs, and appellant's numerous filings, we affirm.

-3-

a
the

having
parties'

Doe's
Rights

claims

pursuant to

Section

1983

of the

Civil

Act and those pursuant to the IDEA were both properly

dismissed.

This

court has previously held

that Harvard "is

not a public institution, and is not sufficiently intertwined

with the Commonwealth of Massachusetts
action' requirement for a

as to meet the 'state

1983 cause of action."

Rice v.
____

President and Fellows of Harvard College, 663 F.2d 336, 337

__________________________________________
(1st Cir. 1981), cert. denied, 456 U.S. 928 (1982).
____ ______

The IDEA

"provides federal money to assist state and local agencies in

________________________
educating handicapped children,
________
upon

State's
_______

compliance

and conditions such

with

procedures." Board of Education v.

__________________
(1982) (emphasis added).
like

Doe, see
___

20 U.S.C.

extensive

funding

goals

and

Rowley, 458 U.S. 176, 179

______

The IDEA does not apply

1412(2)(B)

to adults

(children are

those

between three and twenty-one years old), nor does it apply to

private

institutions like

1415(a)

(IDEA seeks

to

Harvard, see.
___

e.g., 20
___

U.S.C.

guarantee "free

appropriate public

claim under either

the Rehabilitation

education").
To prevail

on a

Act or the ADA Doe

must show, inter alia, that she

has been

_____ ____
discriminated
U.S.C.

against because

704(a)

shall, solely

of

her disability.

("no otherwise qualified

by reason of her

See
___

individual .

or his disability, .

29
. .

. . be

subjected to discrimination") (Rehabilitation Act); 42 U.S.C.

12112(a) ("[n]o covered entity shall discriminate against a

-4-

qualified

individual

disability of
summary

with

disability

such individual")

judgment Harvard

(ADA).

presented

because
In

of

the

its motion

for

sworn affidavits,

with

documentary support, which indicated that it had accommodated

Doe's disability to
psychologist
presented

the full extent recommended

Doe consulted
evidence

on

that

this matter.

the

discrimination were taken for

other

acts

by the only
Harvard
of

also

alleged

legitimate, non-discriminatory

reasons.
In opposition
set forth
56(e),

to the

motion for summary

no specific facts as
but

only

judgment, Doe

required by Fed. R.

"'conclusory

allegations,

Civ. P.

improbable

inferences, and

unsupported speculation'" that she

the victim of discrimination.

had been

Pagano v. Frank, 983 F.2d 343,

______
_____

347 (1st Cir. 1993) (quoting Medina-Munoz v. Reynolds Tobacco

____________
________________
Co., 896 F.2d 5, 8 (1st Cir. 1990)).
__
to

withstand

judgment.

properly

See also
___ ____

Medicine, 976 F.2d 791,

________
'is

merely

colorable

supported

Wynne
_____

v.

is not sufficient

motion

or is

not

for

summary

Tufts Univ. School of

________________________

794 (1st Cir. 1992)

cannot deter summary judgment")

Lobby, Inc.,
__________

This

("evidence that

significantly

probative'

(quoting Anderson v. Liberty

________
_______

477 U.S. 242, 249-50 (1986),

cert. denied, 113

____ ______

S.Ct. 1845 (1993).

On appeal, Doe has also raised several other claims.
need

not

address

some

of

these

because

they

were

We
not

-5-

presented

first to the district

court.

See,
___

e.g., Kale v.
___
____

Combined Ins. Co., 861 F.2d 746, 755 (1st Cir. 1988).
_________________

In any

event, none appears to have any merit.

The

judgment

appellant's

of

action is

the

district

affirmed.
________

The

court
order

denying appellant's

request for a preliminary

affirmed.
________

denial

The

reconsideration
court

judge

request
that

is affirmed.
________

to recuse

for oral

this court

of

himself

argument is
reconsider its

appellant's
The
is

dismissing
of the

court

injunction is
motion

for

refusal by

the district

affirmed.
________

Appellant's

denied.
______
denial

Appellant's request
of her

request for

district court transcripts at court cost is denied.

______

-6-