Spencer Peterson v. California Department of Corrections & Rehabilitation

Good Law
542 F. App'x 553
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitOctober 9, 201312-16295California271 words

Opinion

Opinion

MEMORANDUM

Spencer Peterson, III, appeals pro se from the district court’s summary judgment in his employment action alleging race discrimination and retaliation in violation of federal and state law. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291 . We review de novo, Vasquez v. County of Los Angeles, 349 F.3d 634, 639 (9th Cir.2004), and we affirm.

The district court properly granted summary judgment on Peterson’s racial discrimination claims under Title VII and California’s Fair Employment and Housing Act (“FEHA”) because Peterson failed to raise a genuine dispute of material fact as to whether defendants’ legitimate, nondiscriminatory reasons for failing to promote him were pretextual. See id. at 640-42 & n. 5 (discussing elements of a discrimination claim under Title VII and explaining that circumstantial evidence of pretext must be specific and substantial); see also Metoyer v. Chassman, 504 F.3d 919, 941 (9th Cir.2007) (“California courts apply the Title VII framework to claims brought under FEHA.”).

The district court properly granted summary judgment on Peterson’s retaliation claims because Peterson failed to raise a genuine dispute of material fact as to whether there was…

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.