If he was maligned then why doesn’t he claim that? He claims the act of suspension is what led to him losing his private contracts. Not slander or being malign

If he was maligned then why doesn’t he claim that? He claims the act of suspension is what led to him losing his private contracts. Not slander or being maligned. Suspension is a normal part of university investigations that everyone agrees to. The fact that hoti are companies that employ him are able to use that to terminate his at will employment or contract with them says nothing about UCLA doing anything wrong.