USPS

MEMORANDUM

Charles Edward Allen appeals pro se from the district court’s judgment dismissing his employment action alleging, among other claims, a violation of the Family Medical Leave Act (“FMLA”). We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291 . We review de novo. Mangano v. United States, 529 F.3d 1243 , 1245 n. 2 (9th Cir.2008) (dismissal for lack of subject matter jurisdiction); Saul v. United States, 928 F.2d 829, 832 (9th Cir.1991) (summary judgment). We may affirm on any ground supported by the record, Johnson v. Riverside Healthcare Sys., LP, 534 F.3d 1116, 1121 (9th Cir.2008), and we affirm.

The district court properly granted summary judgment on Allen’s FMLA claim because Allen failed to raise a genuine dispute of material fact as to whether the United States Postal Service interfered with the exercise of his rights under the FMLA or retaliated against him for exercising his rights under the FMLA. See Bailey v. Sw. Gas Co., 275 F.3d 1181, 1185-86 (9th Cir.2002) (employer bears the “right and responsibility” of inquiring after medical certification to determine if leave is covered by FMLA, and employee’s “refusal to provide additional information [is] not a protected…