Page:Lindsley v. TRT Holdings (20-10263) (2021) Opinion.pdf/10

 Lindsley established a prima facie case under Title VII and the Texas Labor Code based on male food and beverage directors at different Omni locations. We therefore remand this issue to the district court.

We reverse the district court’s grant of summary judgment for Lindsley’s pay discrimination claims as it pertains to Walker, Pollard, and Cornelius—the three men who previously held the same position as Lindsley yet were paid more. We affirm the district court’s grant of summary judgment for Lindsley’s Equal Pay Act claim insofar as it relies on other unnamed male food and beverage directors from different Omni hotels. We remand for a determination of whether Lindsley can establish a prima facie case with respect to those comparators under Title VII and the Texas Labor Code.

Turning to her promotional discrimination claims: Lindsley argues that Omni violated Title VII, 42 U.S.C. §§ 2000e et seq., and §§ 21.001 et seq., by declining to promote her because of her sex. We utilize the same McDonnell Douglas burden shifting framework for these claims, too. See McDonnell Douglas, 411 U.S. at 802; ''Alamo Heights Indep. Sch. Dist. v. Clark'', 544 S.W.3d 755, 764 n.5 (Tex. 2018). To establish a prima facie case, the plaintiff must show “(1) that [she] is a member of the protected class; (2) that [s]he sought and was qualified for the position; (3) that [s]he was rejected for the position; and (4) that the employer continued to seek or promote[] applicants with the plaintiff’s qualifications.” ''Davis v. Dall. Area Rapid Transit'', 383 F.3d 309, 317 (5th Cir. 2004). The district court stopped here, granting Omni’s motion for summary judgment because Lindsley could not “show that she was ever rejected for the Omni Houston Food and Beverage Director position.” It reasoned that, because Lindsley withdrew