Clarence Boyce v. Alejandro Mayorkas

Good Law
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitNovember 27, 202423-55020California365 words

Opinion

Opinion

FILED

NOT FOR PUBLICATION

NOV 27 2024

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK

U.S. COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

CLARENCE ETHAN BOYCE, No. 23-55020

Plaintiff-Appellant, D.C. No. 5:18-cv-01576-CBM-SHK v.

ALEJANDRO N. MAYORKAS, United MEMORANDUM* States Secretary of Homeland Security,

Defendant-Appellee.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Central District of California Consuelo B. Marshall, District Judge, Presiding

Submitted November 27, 2024**

Before: O’SCANNLAIN, FERNANDEZ, and SILVERMAN, Circuit Judges.

Clarence Boyce appeals the district court’s judgment following a bench trial

on his Title VII retaliation claim. We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §

1291. We review the findings of fact for clear error and the conclusions of law de

* This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3. ** The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2). novo. Langer v. Kiser, 57 F.4th 1085, 1100 (9th Cir. 2023).…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.