A federal judge rejected the town of Castle Rock’s effort to dismiss an ex-employee’s age and gender discrimination lawsuit on Wednesday, while deeming the case a close call.

Carl E. Filler, who was in his mid-60s when the town hired him as a traffic engineering technician, was employed for only six months between July 2022 and January 2023. He alleged that everything changed weeks into his tenure when he contracted COVID-19 and wore a face covering to a meeting.

“What’s up with the mask? Nobody but old people wear masks anymore,” his supervisor allegedly said.

Afterward, Filler’s supervisor allegedly denied his purchasing requests. Filler was excluded from scheduled meetings and trainings, and managers “were no longer paying any attention to him.” Filler learned the town was hiring a second engineering technician, who later replaced him.

The town fired Filler the day of his six-month performance review, and after his supervisor allegedly told Filler he was “doing just fine.”

Filler sued Castle Rock for age discrimination, primarily based on his supervisor’s “old people” remark, plus gender discrimination. The gender-related claim was based on the allegation that Filler’s predecessor was a woman who performed less well than Filler and was still allowed to remain with the town, as well as the assertion that Filler’s successor was a woman.

“The fact that Mr. Filler was an older-generation male — that was known when he was hired,” Peter H. Doherty, the attorney for Castle Rock, argued in court. “This is not a situation you oftentimes see in discrimination cases based on age where someone has worked for 30, 35 years and there are issues regarding age. This is a person who was hired knowing what his age was, what his gender was.”

“From our standpoint, the timeline strongly favors Mr. Filler’s claims,” responded attorney David J. Meretta for Filler. “You have the age-related remark, followed by a number of adverse actions.”

U.S. District Court Judge Charlotte N. Sweeney, a former employment discrimination lawyer, concluded Filler had sufficiently alleged specific instances of less-favorable treatment than his younger, female peers.

“It’s a closer call than one might have imagined,” she cautioned. “I do think the defendant has pointed out some areas to be concerned about. It doesn’t make sense that this is the same group that hired him that suddenly turns on him. They hired him knowing his age and his gender.”

However, Sweeney referenced a U.S. Supreme Court decision from June, Ames v. Ohio Department of Youth Services, which rejected the concept embraced by the federal appeals court for Colorado that members of a majority demographic group have a higher burden to show they were victims of discrimination.

“In Ames, the Supreme Court made clear that claims by members of majority classes operate the same as discrimination claims by other classes,” she said.

The case is Filler v. Town of Castle Rock.