{"meta":{"exportedAt":"2026-10-02T17:25:20.276Z","formatVersion":2,"selection":{"q":"applicant-screening","system":"","harm":"","context":"","country":"","role":"","relation":"unknown","evidence":"","year":"2023","response":"","severity":"","verification":"","view":"incidents","sort":"added"},"totalIncidents":1,"coverage":{"cases":1,"countries":0,"languages":1,"unknownLocation":1,"locationPending":0,"unknownLanguage":0,"unknownDate":0,"lawsuits":1,"regulatory":0,"minors":0,"coreRelations":0,"contextualRelations":0,"mixedRelations":0,"unknownRelations":1,"relationPending":0,"relationUnknown":1},"countingNote":"Distinct public cases in this selection. People counts apply within individual cases only; cross-case person overlap has not been resolved. No population incidence estimate.","affectedCountNote":"Interpret person counts with affectedCountStatus and the reported effects. Unquantified zeros are placeholders, not a measured zero.","source":"AI incidents","publisher":"NOPE","url":"https://nope.net/incidents","license":"CC BY 4.0"},"incidents":[{"id":"2023-harper-v-sirius-xm-alleged-ai-hiring-screening","caseFacts":{"claims":[{"id":"c1","status":"documented","evidence":[{"locator":"'On August 4, 2025, he filed the instant federal lawsuit alleging race discrimination'; 'specifically through its alleged use of AI-powered recruiting tools integrated into the ATS that Defendant uses to screen applications'; 'brings a class'; 'alleging employment discrimination in violation of Title VII and'","relation":"supports","source_id":"s1"}],"assertion":"On 4 August 2025 Arshon Harper filed a proposed class action against Sirius XM Radio in the US District Court for the Eastern District of Michigan, alleging race discrimination under Title VII and Section 1981 through the company's alleged use of AI-powered recruiting tools to screen applications.","causal_attribution":"Established by the court's order, which recites the filing."},{"id":"c2","status":"documented","evidence":[{"locator":"'he applied for'; 'approximately 150 positions with Sirius XM'; 'all but one of his applications were rejected before the interview stage'; 'he received a 30-minute interview for a role in IT Desktop Support, but was rejected post-interview'","relation":"supports","source_id":"s1"},{"locator":"'Harper applied to 150 job openings at Sirius XM and was rejected for each, receiving only one interview.'","relation":"supports","source_id":"s2"}],"assertion":"The complaint, as recited in the court's order, alleges that from November 2023 to November 2024 Harper applied for approximately 150 positions at Sirius XM for which he was qualified, that all but one application was rejected before the interview stage, and that after one 30-minute interview he was also rejected.","causal_attribution":"The order documents the content of the complaint; the rejections themselves are allegations that the court accepted as true only for the purpose of the motion."},{"id":"c3","status":"disputed","evidence":[{"locator":"'utilizes algorithmic decisionmaking tools provided by third-party vendor iCIMS in its hiring process'; 'such as candidate-matching and shortlisting features'; 'Plaintiff alleges upon information and belief that the iCIMS AI/ML tools used by Sirius XM evaluate applicants using data points that act as proxies for race'; 'such as educational institutions, employment history, and zip codes'","relation":"supports","source_id":"s1"},{"locator":"'does not, nor has it ever, used iCIMS or any other AI/Machine Learning tool in the hiring process'","relation":"contradicts","source_id":"s1"},{"locator":"'Even assuming that Defendant uses AI/ML in the hiring process'","relation":"context","source_id":"s1"}],"assertion":"Sirius XM used AI and machine-learning features of the iCIMS applicant tracking system, such as candidate matching and shortlisting, to screen and reject job applicants, and those tools evaluate applicants using data points that act as proxies for race, such as educational institutions, employment history and zip codes. The complaint alleges this, partly upon information and belief, as recited in the court's order; Sirius XM says it has never used iCIMS or any AI tool in hiring, and the court did not decide the question.","causal_attribution":"The plaintiff's allegation as recited by the court, contested by the company's stated position; unresolved."},{"id":"c4","status":"documented","evidence":[{"locator":"'does not, nor has it ever, used iCIMS or any other AI/Machine Learning tool in the hiring process'; 'Defendant maintains that it previously communicated to Plaintiff that it does not use AI'; 'The Court therefore excludes the EEOC Statement'","relation":"supports","source_id":"s1"}],"assertion":"The order records Sirius XM's position, quoted from its EEOC position statement, that it 'does not, nor has it ever, used iCIMS or any other AI/Machine Learning tool in the hiring process', and the company's contention that it told the plaintiff it does not use AI during the EEOC process and later through his counsel. The court excluded the position statement from its consideration of the motion.","causal_attribution":"The order records the company's position and contention; the court excluded the position statement and did not decide whether the company used AI."},{"id":"c5","status":"documented","evidence":[{"locator":"'Even assuming that Defendant uses AI/ML in the hiring process, Plaintiff has not pleaded factual allegations sufficient to explain how'; 'DIMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE'; 'Dated: September 30, 2026'","relation":"supports","source_id":"s1"},{"locator":"'failed to establish a viable claim of employment discrimination, regardless of whether the company actually uses the artificial intelligence tools that he alleged'","relation":"supports","source_id":"s2"}],"assertion":"On 30 September 2026 Judge Terrence G. Berg granted Sirius XM judgment on the pleadings and dismissed the complaint without prejudice, holding that even assuming the company used AI in hiring, Harper had not pleaded facts explaining how it could have been used to discriminate against him by race.","causal_attribution":"The order itself."}],"effects":[{"label":"rejection of all but one of about 150 job applications, which the applicant attributes to AI screening (complaint allegation; the employer denies using AI)","claim_id":"c2","direction":"negative"}],"sources":[{"id":"s1","url":"https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.mied.387495/gov.uscourts.mied.387495.19.0.pdf","kind":"court_order","access":"read","language":"en","translation_note":"Read in English on 2026-10-02: Order Granting Defendant's Motion for Judgment on the Pleadings, ECF No. 19, Harper v. Sirius XM Radio, LLC, No. 2:25-cv-12403 (E.D. Mich. 30 September 2026), 20 pages, free RECAP copy.","independence_group":"mied-harper-docket"},{"id":"s2","url":"https://news.bloomberglaw.com/daily-labor-report/sirius-xm-wins-dismissal-of-ai-related-racial-hiring-bias-claims","kind":"news_report","access":"read","language":"en","translation_note":"Read in English on 2026-10-02 up to the paywall (headline and first three paragraphs of the Bloomberg Law report by Chris Marr, 1 October 2026).","independence_group":"bloomberg-law"}],"version":1,"ai_roles":["institutional_use"],"contexts":["work"],"unknowns":["Whether Sirius XM used any AI or machine-learning screening tool on these applications.","Why the applications were rejected.","Whether the plaintiff will amend, refile or appeal."],"geography":{"basis":"The order describes the plaintiff as from Detroit, Michigan, and the case was decided in the US District Court for the Eastern District of Michigan. It does not say where the applications were processed, so no event country is recorded.","court_countries":["US"],"event_countries":[],"affected_person_countries":["US"]},"publication":{"basis":"Published as a contextual case of an applicant who attributes repeated job rejections to an employer's alleged AI screening, with the employer's denial and the dismissal on the pleadings recorded from the court order. The plaintiff sues in his own name; the AI connection is disputed and unestablished.","reviewed_on":"2026-10-02"},"ai_involvement":{"basis":"The applicant alleges, on information and belief, that iCIMS AI screening features made or shaped the rejections, which would be a decision about him. Sirius XM says it has never used iCIMS or any AI tool in hiring, and the court did not decide the question. Because the AI system's role in any decision about him is not established, the relation is recorded as unknown.","status":"disputed"},"person_relations":["unknown"]},"name":"Harper v. Sirius XM: an applicant says AI screening tools rejected nearly all of about 150 job applications on the basis of race; the company denies using AI in hiring and a federal court dismissed the complaint without prejudice","summary":"Arshon Harper, a job applicant from Detroit, sued Sirius XM Radio in August 2025, alleging that AI screening tools in the iCIMS applicant tracking system rejected him because of his race. According to the complaint, as recited by the court, he applied for about 150 positions between November 2023 and November 2024 and all but one application was rejected before the interview stage. Sirius XM's EEOC position statement says it has never used iCIMS or any AI tool in hiring, and the company says it told the plaintiff's counsel the same; the court excluded that statement from its ruling. On 30 September 2026 a federal judge in Michigan dismissed the complaint without prejudice. The judge held that, even assuming AI was used, the complaint did not explain how it could have discriminated against him. The rejections and the AI connection are allegations, and the AI connection is disputed.","incidentDate":"2023-11-01","incidentEndDate":"2024-11-30","incidentKind":"bounded_series","incidentDatePrecision":"range","exposurePattern":"repeated_interactions","reportedDate":"2026-10-01","aiSystem":"AI and machine-learning features of the iCIMS applicant tracking system (candidate matching and shortlisting), alleged by the plaintiff on information and belief; Sirius XM denies using them","aiProduct":"iCIMS AI screening tools (reported)","aiCompany":"iCIMS","severity":"low","verificationStatus":"unverified","harmCategories":[],"harmOutcomes":["professional_harm"],"harmOutcomeSummary":"The applicant says all but one of about 150 applications to Sirius XM were rejected before interview and attributes this to race discrimination by AI screening tools; the employer denies using AI and the court found the complaint did not plausibly link any tool to discrimination (allegation, disputed).","frameworkFacets":[],"causationStatus":"disputed","participantUsersAffectedMin":0,"otherPeopleHarmedMin":1,"affectedCountStatus":"exact","affectedCountEvidence":"One person: the plaintiff, who reports the rejections. No other class members are identified (the order notes none). He was an applicant to an employer that allegedly used the tool, so he is counted among people affected through institutional use. Exact 1.","victimAgeRange":"adult","jurisdiction":"US-MI","platformType":"other","outcomeType":"lawsuit_dismissed","outcomeStatus":"resolved","primarySourceUrl":"https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.mied.387495/gov.uscourts.mied.387495.19.0.pdf","primarySourceLabel":"Order granting judgment on the pleadings, Harper v. Sirius XM Radio (E.D. Mich.), 30 September 2026","firstPublishedAt":"2026-10-02T03:21:01.983585+00:00","updatedAt":"2026-10-02T03:21:01.983585+00:00","scopeVersion":"facts-v3","tags":["lawsuit","hiring","employment","applicant-screening","icims","race-discrimination","dismissed","institutional-use"]}]}