Elizabeth-Ann Motoyama v. State of Hawaii, Department Of

MEMORANDUM

Elizabeth-Ann K. Motoyama appeals pro se from the district court’s summary judgment in her employment action alleging, among other claims, retaliation under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act (“Title VII”) and the Americans with Disabilities Act (“ADA”). We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291 . We review de novo, Gribben v. United Parcel Serv., Inc., 528 F.3d 1166, 1169 (9th Cir.2008), and we affirm.

The district court properly granted summary judgment on Motoyama’s Title VII retaliation claim, and her retaliation claim under Title I of the ADA against defendant Okimoto for prospective injunctive relief, because Motoyama failed to raise a genuine dispute of material fact as to whether there was a causal connection between her engagement in a protected activity and an adverse employment action against her. See Vasquez v. County of Los Angeles, 349 F.3d 634, 646 (9th Cir.2004) (elements of prima facie Title VII retaliation case); Pardi v. Kaiser Found. Hosps., Inc., 389 F.3d 840, 849-50 (9th Cir.2004) (elements of prima facie case of retaliation under Title I of the ADA); Nelson v. Pima Cmty. Coll., 83 F.3d 1075 , 1082 (9th Cir.1996) (employee who handles…