Joseph Cordero v. Miraval Holding
Opinion
Opinion
MEMORANDUM
Joseph Cordero appeals the district court’s grant of summary judgment in favor of Miraval Holding, LLC (“Miraval”) on all of his claims under the Americans with Disabilities Act (“ADA”). Cordero argues that Miraval discriminated against him when it terminated him; that Miraval discriminated and retaliated against him when it placed Cordero on probation, gave him a performance improvement plan, and required him to attend performance evaluation meetings; and that Miraval failed to provide him a reasonable accommodation when it refused to permit his grandmother to attend his weekly performance evaluation meetings. We affirm.
1. Miraval argues that Cordero waived his claim of discrimination related to his termination because he failed to raise it before the district court. As a pro se plaintiff, Cordero’s pleadings must be liberally construed; the sole question is whether Miraval had fair notice of Cordero’s discriminatory termination claim. See Hebbe v. Pliler, 627 F.3d 338, 342 (9th Cir.2010); Yamaguchi v. U.S. Dep’t of the Air Force, 109 F.3d 1475, 1481 (9th Cir.1997). Cordero raised this claim multiple times in his district court filings, and, liberally construed,…