Clark v. Claremont University Center (1992) 6 Cal. App. 4th 639, 662 8 Cal. Rptr. 2d 151 and Roebuck v. Drexel University (3d Cir. 1988) both involved tenure decisions made after several levels of review and recommendations. In Clark, there was evidence of discrimination by some individuals involved in some stages of the review process; in Roebuck, there was evidence supporting an inference of pretext in the reasons given for some of the recommendations. In the context of the academic tenure system, in which decisions and recommendations made in earlier levels of review may be available to decision makers at subsequent levels, it clearly makes sense to acknowledge that the final decision may be influenced by the discriminatory intent of individuals playing a role at any point in the decisionmaking process. The situation in the present case is very different, as it involves discrete hiring decisions made by unconnected individuals in different departments. Moreover, Clark and Roebuck v. Drexel University (3d Cir. 1988) merely held that a jury is entitled to infer that discriminatory intent in some aspects of a tenure decision may influence the ultimate decision.