“[T]he evidence shows a conflict regarding [decision-maker’s] stated reasons for not renewing [non-party witness’s] contract. (‘A court may infer pretext where a defendant has provided inconsistent or conflicting explanations for its conduct.’).”  “According to [non-party witness’s] testimony, when [decision-maker] notified her that that her contract was not being renewed, he said “due to the budget cuts, we’re going to have to let you go.” However, during his deposition, [decision-maker] testified he did not renew [non-party witness’s] contract because he ‘needed a staff position of a higher category according to the HR for the school and that higher category would include a higher level of experience or education background.’”

Hague v. Univ. of Tx. Health & Sci. Ctr. at San Antonio, 560 Fed. Appx. 328, 336–37 (5th. Cir. March 28, 2014) (Benavides, J.).