U.S. Magistrate Judge Andrew M. Edison held that Vivian Chen, a deaf doctoral student school, adequately alleged that UTMB failed to engage in good faith in the interactive process required.
Chen, whose native language is American Sign Language, requested ASL interpreters and Communication Access Realtime Translation services before starting medical school in August 2024.
The university instead substituted remote CART and a Video Remote Interpreting service called Propio ONE, which Chen’s complaint alleged resulted in a 30% error rate in technical medical terminology.
Chen alleged that the inadequate accommodations forced her to rely on classmates for note-taking and interpretation, imposing an "inappropriate burden" on her peers and denying her equal access to her educational program.
UTMB argued it was entitled to sovereign immunity because it had engaged in the interactive process, even if it ultimately denied the requested accommodations.
The university cited an "undue burden" defense but did not provide a financial analysis, despite Chen’s allegation that the cost of her preferred accommodations represented only 0.0006% of UTMB’s $3.3 billion operating budget.
Edison noted that UTMB’s internal investigation acknowledged deficiencies in its ADA office’s engagement, stating it "would have been more prudent for the ADA office to continue extending the offer to engage."
The judge ruled that Chen’s allegations that UTMB abruptly terminated discussions and refused to substantiate its undue burden claim plausibly implied she was "irrationally deprived of [equal protection under the law]."
Because the alleged conduct plausibly violated the Fourteenth Amendment, Congress validly abrogated state sovereign immunity under Title II of the ADA, allowing the claim to proceed.
Chen’s family paid $19,260 for CART services during the 2024–2025 academic year, and she faces projected expenses exceeding $75,000 over her four-year doctoral program if the discrimination continues.