Fox v. Bakery, Confectionery, Tobacco Workers & Grain Millers International Union, Local No. 24

MEMORANDUM

Alejandro Fox appeals the district court’s grant of summary judgment for Defendants. We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1291 , and we AFFIRM.

1. Fox’s contract-related claims (Counts 1, 2, and 5) are “substantially dependent” on interpretation of Local 24’s bylaws and the Union’s constitution. Sprewell v. Golden State Warriors, 266 F.3d 979, 990 (9th Cir.2001). These claims are thus preempted by § 301 of the Labor Management Relations Act (LMRA), 29 U.S.C. § 185 . Id. Because they are preempted, the district court correctly dismissed Counts 1, 2, and 5 as barred by the six-month statute of limitations applicable to § 301 claims. Moore v. Local Union 569 of Int’l Bhd. of Elec. Workers, 989 F.2d 1534 , 1541(9th Cir.1993).

2. Fox’s “wrongful” discharge claim regarding 29 U.S.C. § 411 (a)(5) of the Labor Management Reporting and Disclosure Act (LMRDA) lacks merit. 29 U.S.C. § 411 (a)(5) protects members’ procedural rights as members, but “does not apply to removal or suspension from union office.” Grand Lodge of Int’l. Ass’n of Machinists v. King, 335 F.2d 340, 342-43 (9th Cir. 1964). In addition, the district court correctly noted that § 411(a)(5) explicitly…