On Thursday, Ellen Pao, a former junior partner at venture capital firm Kleiner Perkins, dropped her gender discrimination lawsuit against the firm, saying, “I have gone as far as I can go and cannot commit the resources and time that would be needed to continue.”

Pao filed her lawsuit in 2012, alleging that she was passed up for promotions because of her gender and that senior members of the firm retaliated against her when she complained about harassment. The lawsuit made its way to a closely watched jury trial this March, putting both Pao, who was the interim CEO of Reddit at the time, and Kleiner Perkins under unwanted public scrutiny. At the end of the five-week trial, the jury decided against Pao and in favor of Kleiner Perkins.

Pao then signaled her intent to appeal as Kleiner Perkins asked for nearly $1 million in costs from Pao. A judge later reduced the firm's request for costs significantly to just $276,000. In the meantime, Pao resigned from her position as CEO of Reddit after a number of decisions made by the company's administration outraged Reddit users. Pao cited differences with the company's board as her reason for departure.

Today, speaking exclusively to Re/code, Pao said she couldn't continue her lawsuit against Kleiner Perkins, although she felt justified to do so. “Seeking justice in the courts has been painful for me personally and professionally, and for my family,” Pao writes in an essay on the site. “I am now moving on, paying Kleiner Perkins’ legal costs and dropping my appeal. My experience shows how difficult it is to address discrimination through the court system.”

Pao continues, listing some of the issues she felt harmed her in the trial. These included the way gender discrimination is litigated in California, what she described as the wealth of resources the Kleiner Perkins was able to deploy during the case, and the inability to stop the jury and judges from reading Twitter and the news, among other reasons.

Since bringing my case, I discovered that the court system today is not well-designed to address these [workplace discrimination] issues, either. First, to win in California court, discrimination has to be intentional and a substantial motivating factor for different treatment. This standard is vague and hard to prove; there could also be other factors like racial or age discrimination, personal animus or unconscious biases. These all add up to excuses that can prevent a finding of discrimination or retaliation. Second, harassment and discrimination claims have to be filed within one year under California law. Contrast that with three years for property damage claims and four years for breach of contract claims. The deck is stacked against plaintiffs in other ways, as well. From the first day of trial, I saw how hard it was going to be to win when every potential juror who expressed a belief that sexism exists in tech—a belief that is widely recognized and documented—was not allowed to serve on the jury.

Kleiner Perkins has previously offered to waive its request for costs if Pao would agree to drop an appeal, so it's likely that Pao could end up paying nothing. A Kleiner Perkins spokesperson told Ars in a statement, “We are glad to put this trial behind us. There is no question diversity in the workplace is an important issue. KPCB remains committed to supporting women and minorities in venture capital and technology both inside our firm and within our industry.”