African Americans were grossly underrepresented in either the grand or petit juries. Men. Finally, the Defendant alleges absolute disparities for men of 4.6 percent and 5.1 percent, and comparative disparities of 9.5 percent and 10.5 percent, for the grand and petit jury respectively. For the same reasons given above, and assuming that men constitute a distinct group, these numbers are insufficient to make out a prima facie case of a Sixth Amendment violation. 3. Is Under-Representation Due to Systematic Exclusion of Group? Because the Defendant has failed to make the requisite statistical showing for any of the allegedly underrepresented groups, the Defendant’s Sixth Amendment claim fails and the Court need not address the third prong of the Duren test. See Shinault, 147 F.3d at 1273 (<HOLDING>). But see Haworth, 948 F.Supp. at 986 (stating
holding that second element of qualified immunity test is whether the law violated was clearly established holding that a plaintiff who could not demonstrate every element of the mcdonnell douglas test could nonetheless demonstrate a prima facie case holding the plaintiff failed to make a prima facie case that the defendants failure to promote him was discriminatory where the plaintiff failed to that show he was qualified for the relevant position holding that the defendant failed to make out a prima facie test when he could not satisfy the statistical showing required by the second duren element and declining to analyze the third element holding that knowledge element could not be deemed in favor of plaintiff where defendant objected to the omission of that element from the jury charge