Any actual details that can be verified that it was frivolous?
She got fired because she wasn't doing her job. She sued on the grounds of "gender discrimination."
Not being a liberal, I tend to take an employer at their word when they fire someone for cause rather than buy into victimology.
That detail made me suspect it was frivolous. Then when she sued for 7 million dollars over a $65,000/year job for "intentional infliction of emotional distress" I knew it was frivolous.
As I read further about her tales of missing an opportunity to get a Master's at Princeton (when she couldn't even finish a BA at Fairleigh Dickinson) and that ISI owed her more money to compensate her because she was incapable of finding another job due to the psychological trauma of being fired, I knew we were beyond frivolous.
The courts seemed to think so, since they dismissed the case several times before she finally gave up trying to hit the litigation lottery.