David Rey v. C&H Sugar Co.

MEMORANDUM

David Rey appeals the district court’s grant of summary judgment in favor of his employer, C & H Sugar Company, Inc. and its parent company American Sugar Refining, Inc., on his claims of age discrimination and retaliation in violation of the California Fair Employment and Housing Act (“FEHA”), California Government Code § 12940 et seq. We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1291 and we affirm.

1. The district court did not err in determining that Rey failed to raise questions of fact regarding whether C & H’s articulated reason for termination was pretext for age discrimination. To show pretext, “there must be evidence supporting a rational inference that intentional discrimination, on grounds prohibited by the statute, was the true cause of the employer’s actions.” Guz v. Bechtel Nat’l Inc., 24 Cal.4th 317 , 100 Cal.Rptr.2d 352 , 8 P.3d 1089, 1117 (2000). “[Sjection 12940(a) does not purport to outlaw discriminatory thoughts, beliefs, or stray remarks that are unconnected to employment decision-making.” Harr is v. City of Santa Monica, 56 Cal.4th 203 , 152 Cal.Rptr.3d 392 , 294 P.3d 49, 65 (2013). Rey did not present any direct or circumstantial evidence that…