Marilyn Lee v. John Potter

Good Law
358 F. App'x 966
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitDecember 16, 200908-17328California577 words

Opinion

Opinion

Plaintiff Marilyn Lee appeals the summary judgment entered in favor of Defendant United States Postmaster General John E. Potter. On de novo review, Dietrich v. John Ascuaga’s Nugget, 548 F.3d 892, 896 (9th Cir.2008), we affirm.

1. In a diversity case involving claims of employment discrimination under state law, we apply the burden-shifting analysis set forth in McDonnell Douglas Corp. v. Green, 411 U.S. 792, 802-04 , 93 S.Ct. 1817 , 36 L.Ed.2d 668 (1973). Snead v. Metro. Prop. & Cas. Ins. Co., 237 F.3d 1080, 1093-94 (9th Cir.2001).

(a) Plaintiff failed to establish a prima facie case of retaliation because she was not subjected to an adverse employment action. See Burlington N. & Santa Fe Ry. Co. v. White, 548 U.S. 53, 57 , 126 S.Ct. 2405 , 165 L.Ed.2d 345 (2006). The denial of Plaintiffs request for reassignment did not constitute an adverse employment action. The move to supervisor was lateral; there was no termination, demotion, bad performance review, or refusal to promote. In fact, the supervisory duties to which Plaintiff was assigned were objectively more desirable than the duties she had held as a secretary. She received a cash award for her performance and received…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.