From Microwave Complaint To Federal Lawsuit: Inside CU Boulder’s Bias Row
A Lunchroom Incident With National Implications
WHAT began as a complaint about the smell of reheated Indian food at the University of Colorado Boulder evolved into a federal civil rights lawsuit that ended in a $200,000 settlement and raised broader questions about cultural bias, institutional response and the boundaries of inclusion on American campuses.
In 2023, Aditya Prakash, a doctoral student in anthropology, was heating palak paneer in a shared microwave when a staff member objected to the smell and asked him not to use the appliance. According to court filings, Prakash responded calmly, explaining he was simply warming his lunch and would leave shortly.
He later characterised the encounter as a racial and ethnic microaggression. Over the next two years, he alleged, the situation escalated beyond a minor workplace disagreement.
Escalation and Administrative Action
Prakash said he was summoned to multiple meetings with senior faculty and accused of causing staff to “feel unsafe.” He was reported to the university’s Office of Student Conduct, an action he argued was disproportionate to the initial complaint.
Two days after the microwave dispute, his partner, Urmi Bhattacheryya — also a doctoral candidate — brought Indian food to campus alongside three other students in what they described as a peaceful act of solidarity. The group was subsequently accused of “inciting a riot,” though the complaints were later dismissed.
Bhattacheryya alleged she was removed from her teaching assistant role without prior notice.
Tensions intensified after a department chair circulated an email advising members of the community “to avoid preparing foods with strong or lingering smells in the main office.” Critics argued the message implicitly targeted certain cultural cuisines and contradicted the department’s own public commitments to diversity and anti-racism.
Legal Action and Settlement
In 2025, the couple filed a federal civil rights lawsuit alleging discrimination and the creation of a hostile academic environment. The complaint contended that the university’s actions reflected deeper biases against international students and negatively affected their academic progression.
The university ultimately settled the case. Under the agreement, CU Boulder paid $200,000 and awarded the plaintiffs the master’s degrees they had completed during their doctoral studies. However, the settlement bars them from future enrolment or employment at the institution.
Legal analysts note that such settlements do not necessarily constitute admissions of wrongdoing but often reflect cost-benefit calculations by institutions seeking to limit prolonged litigation.
Beyond the Settlement
The case underscores a broader tension confronting higher education: how institutions interpret and respond to cultural conflict in shared spaces. Food, scholars of migration and identity observe, often becomes a symbolic battleground for inclusion, difference and belonging.
While CU Boulder has not publicly conceded discriminatory intent, the settlement highlights the reputational and financial risks universities face when routine interpersonal disputes escalate into allegations of systemic bias.
For Prakash and Bhattacheryya, the resolution closes a contentious chapter. For universities nationwide, it serves as a cautionary tale on how micro-level incidents, if poorly managed, can evolve into macro-level legal and ethical reckonings.
