University officials are holding steady in their refusal to address the suspension of mathematics professor David Massey, who in turn is abiding by his university-imposed sanction barring him from talking to Northeastern students.

Massey, former chair of the math department, was suspended March 3 and prohibited by university officials from talking to Northeastern students.

University officials declined to comment on the case.

The News obtained an e-mail from a non-student source that was written by Massey and outlines his view of the events leading up to his suspension, including his confusion about whether the administration was following an informal or formal process.

Massey declined to comment.

His attorney, Dahlia Rudavsky, would not comment on the complaint brought against her client but said Massey felt he “was treated without just cause” and is planning to file a faculty grievance.

“He expects to follow that process and expects that the process will show him to be unjustly treated,” she said.

The deadline to file a faculty grievance is 90 days after the grievance occurs. Massey was suspended March 3.

According to the e-mail obtained by The News, Donnie Perkins, dean of the Office of Affirmative Action and Diversity, summoned Massey to the office Jan. 3 to discuss a confidential complaint matter, which turned out to be a complaint against Massey.

In the e-mail, Massey said he spoke with Perkins and Associate University Counsel Lisa Sinclair the next day about the complaint, and, according to the e-mail, Massey was told the administration was following a formal complaint process. The e-mail also said administration officials later denied qualifying the proceedings as a formal process.

Perkins and Sinclair would not comment Massy’s case, but Perkins described his office as the one that deals with complaints about discrimination and harassment. He said when a person or group of people comes in with a complaint, they listened to it. If the complaint is found to have merit, the person or people in question are brought in and has a chance to respond. These initial steps are considered informal.

“We are trying to get to the bottom of the issue [in the informal process]. What is the root cause of the issue? What is the matter of conflict or disagreement between the parties?” Perkins said. “And then we try to see the ways in which we can resolve it with their involvement. We try to come to some amicable understanding and/or outcome.”

If a mutual understanding cannot be reached, or if the allegations are considered serious enough, the office moves to the formal complaint process, Perkins said.

In the formal process, the allegations are presented to the party being complained about, who again has a chance to respond, he said. The office then takes the information and launches an investigation, which includes looking for and talking to witnesses, he said.

The office can also file a formal complaint on behalf of the party who brought the complaint, Perkins said.

“Now we’re really talking about a whole lot more of investigative work and detail [in the formal process] to determine if those allegations really did occur,” Perkins said. “Not that you’re not doing it in the first half, but the difference is