As societal expectations for addressing sexual harassment and misconduct have evolved, Title IX officers in higher education institutions have endured a roller coaster of changes in the regulatory guidelines for investigating Title IX complaints. The Department of Education’s Office of Civil Rights (OCR) guidance prior to 2011 provided little direction for how universities should approach formal adjudication for sexual misconduct, yet emphasized the importance of protecting parties’ due process rights. In 2011, however, in an effort to address widespread calls for protecting victims of sexual harassment and violence, OCR issued a Dear Colleague Letter (DCL) that instructed schools to use a “preponderance of the evidence” standard in Title IX cases over the more difficult to prove “clear and convincing” standard.” The 2011 DCL also heightened protections for the accuser, for example, discouraging the use of cross-examination between parties. Since the 2011 DCL, there has been an increase in litigation concerning due process complaints, and a subsequent DCL in 2020 retracted the 2011 guidance in favor of greater protections for the accused. This presentation explores a recent case on due process and Title IX investigations and complaint procedures.