Rajesh Gaur v. City of Hope
Opinion
Opinion
MEMORANDUM
Plaintiff Rajesh Gaur (“Dr. Gaur”) appeals from a judgment entered on a jury verdict in favor of his former employer, Defendant Beckham Research Institute of the City of Hope (“BRI”), on his Title VII claim. We affirm.
The district court excluded evidence relating to promotion decisions made by Dr. Arthur Riggs, who served as BRI’s Director before Dr. Richard Jove, the ultimate decision-maker with respect to Dr. Gaur’s denial of promotion and discharge. We review a district court’s evidentiary rulings for abuse of discretion. See Obrey v. Johnson, 400 F.8d 691, 694 (9th Cir. 2005).
Dr. Gaur acknowledges that, after Dr. Jove became the Director of BRI, only Dr. Jove had the authority to decide whether Dr. Gaur would be terminated or promoted. Dr. Gaur contends, however, that past evidence of Dr. Riggs’s allegedly “discriminatory decisions” with respect to Asian and white professors is relevant to establishing a pattern of discrimination that continued under Dr. Jove. In support of this contention, Dr. Gaur relies primarily on the so-called “cat’s paw” theory of liability. See Staub v. Proctor Hosp., 562 U.S. 411 , 131 S.Ct. 1186, 1190 , 179 L.Ed.2d 144 (2011).