A Manhattan judge has dismissed the lawsuit brought by alleged rapist Paul Nungesser against Columbia University, stating that his claims of Title IX discrimination and emotional distress have no real basis.

In the fall of 2014, then-Columbia senior Emma Sulkowicz began carrying a mattress around campus in protest of the continued presence of Nungesser, who she said raped, strangled, and beat her during her sophomore year. The university had found him not responsible, and so for her senior thesis, Sulkowicz vowed to "Carry That Weight" until Nungesser was expelled from school. After two more female students accused him of rape, Nungesser sued the school last April.

Nungesser alleged that Columbia had violated his Title IX rights, which state that no one in any educational program or federally funded activity should "be excluded from participation in, be denied the benefits of, or be subjected to discrimination" on the basis of sex. Title IX claims are more typically seen in cases brought forward by survivors of sexual violence, not alleged perpetrators.

In yesterday's dismissal of Nungesser's complaint, judge Gregory Woods writes that "Nungesser's argument rests on a logical fallacy. He assumes that because the allegations against him concerned a sexual act that everything that follows from it is 'sex-based' within the meaning of Title IX. He is wrong. Taken to its logical extreme, Nungesser’s position would lead to the conclusion that those who commit, or are accused of committing, sexual assault are a protected class under Title IX."

In the 26-page dismissal, Woods states in more than a few ways that Nungesser's understanding of what constitutes a Title IX claim is weak at best. He notes that "even if Sulkowicz had publicly called Nungesser a rapist (by name)...the complaint would not state a Title IX claim," and that "even if Nungesser had pleaded facts sufficient to support a plausible inference of gender-based harassment, his Title IX claim would still fail because he has not alleged harassment 'that is so severe, pervasive, and objectively offensive that it can be said to deprive [him] of access to the educational opportunities or benefits provided by the school.'"

Plus, Woods says, there's no real evidence that Sulkowicz's mattress project prevented Nungesser from attending on-campus career events, as he alleges in his suit: "Aside from the fact that it is debatable whether such events are an educational opportunity...there are no facts supporting this bare assertion—did he even attempt to attend these events? How many events were there? Was he turned away at the door?"

Still, Nungesser can file an amended complaint within 30 days, Woods's dismissal points out, and it seems he just may: his lawyer told Reuters that "we believe that this is a very strong case and we will continue in our pursuit of justice for Mr. Nungesser."

A Columbia spokesperson told the school paper that "we are encouraged that today's ruling brings us closer to the point that this litigation, addressing issues understandably difficult for many, can be concluded."