HBS Graduate Appeals Dismissal of Discrimination Lawsuit Against Harvard

Harvard Business School graduate Yoav Segev filed a notice of appeal Friday morning challenging a December ruling that dismissed his discrimination lawsuit against Harvard and the Harvard University Police Department.

The appeal — filed in the District of Massachusetts — seeks review by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the First Circuit for the decision issued last month by U.S. District Judge Richard G. Stearns. The appellate court will assess whether Stearns correctly applied federal law, rather than reexamining the factual record of the case.

Under First Circuit procedure, Segev’s lawyers will typically have 40 days after the record is filed to file an opening brief identifying the specific legal errors they allege occurred in the district court’s decision. As of Friday afternoon, the First Circuit had not yet issued a briefing schedule.

Segev’s lawyers did not respond to a request for comment about the issues they plan to raise on appeal.

Segev originally filed a 124-page complaint in July 2025, alleging that he was assaulted at a pro-Palestine protest in October 2023 outside the Harvard Business School. According to the complaint, Segev was filming a student-led “die-in” when he was pushed out of the crowd. He alleged that the incident was motivated by antisemitism.

On Dec. 4, 2025, Stearns dismissed the lawsuit, ruling that Segev failed to plausibly allege conduct rising to the level of “severe and pervasive” racial harassment under Title VI.

“Nothing in the Amended Complaint plausibly establishes that any institutional mistreatment Segev may have experienced was motivated by antisemitism,” Stearns wrote. “The direct discrimination claim accordingly is dismissed.”

The appeal places Stearns’ application of the legal standard for dismissing cases before the First Circuit. At that stage of a case, courts assess only whether a complaint plausibly states a claim under federal law, accepting a plaintiff’s factual allegations as true and without resolving factual disputes.

Stearns rejected Segev’s argument that Harvard’s handling of the incident — including its approach to discipline and investigation — could itself constitute discrimination under Title VI. The judge concluded that Segev’s complaint did not plausibly allege that the protesters' actions were motivated by antisemitism as opposed to other, nondiscriminatory considerations.

Stearns dismissed the case without prejudice, allowing Segev to refile the lawsuit. However, the appeal asks the First Circuit to review whether Segev’s claims, as currently pleaded, were sufficient to proceed.

In an amended complaint in August, Segev added Harvard Executive Vice President Meredith L. Weenick ’90 and former HUPD chief Victor A. Clay as defendants, accusing them of delaying disciplinary action related to the incident. Stearns dismissed those claims as well.

The First Circuit has not indicated whether it will hear oral arguments in the case. Federal appellate cases often take months from the filing of an appeal to a final decision, and the timeline depends on how the briefing proceeds.