Wije v. Univ of Texas at Austin

Case: 26-50284 Document: 23-1 Page: 1 Date Filed: 07/15/2026

United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit United States Court of Appeals

Fifth Circuit FILED

No. 26-50284 July 15, 2026

Lyle W. Cayce

Clerk Suran Wije,

Plaintiff—Appellant, versus

University of Texas at Austin; John Doe,

Defendants—Appellees,

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Texas No. 1:24-CV-809

Before Jones, Ho, and Wilson, Circuit Judges.

Per Curiam:*

Prior to November 2005, Suran Wije was employed as an IT systems analyst at the University of Texas. At the time he resigned, he had received notice that the University intended to terminate his employment, and the separation form he received included a comment recommending against future employment at the University. At some point, Wije filed a complaint against the University with the EEOC. Wije alleges that, since filing that Case: 26-50284 Document: 23-1 Page: 2 Date Filed: 07/15/2026 complaint, he has applied for over a thousand jobs, including many with the University, but has not received any interviews. He alleges that, more than two decades since his resignation, the University continues to discriminate and retaliate against him on the basis of his race and national origin.

Wije has brought numerous discrimination lawsuits against the University in both federal and state court over the past decade. Because those earlier claims were dismissed with prejudice, the district court analyzed only those claims not barred by Wije’s previous suits, namely, his discrimination and retaliation claims for not being recently rehired by the University, including a claim that the University discriminated against him by failing to make him aware of upcoming job openings. The district court concluded that Wije failed adequately to plead any employment discrimination claim (or indeed, any relevant facts that could inform a court’s analysis) and thus dismissed the instant lawsuit as frivolous.

After reviewing the briefing and the record, we conclude that the district court thoroughly considered this most recent action brought by Wije, fairly considered his objections to the magistrate judge’s report and recommendation, and committed no reversible error in its decision. Accordingly, we affirm the judgment of the district court essentially for the reasons stated in its thorough, well-reasoned opinion.

AFFIRMED.