James Savina v. Robert Reiser & Company, Inc.

MEMORANDUM

Savina appeals from the district court’s summary judgment in favor of his former employer, Robert Reiser & Company, Inc. (Reiser). The district court had jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1331 , and we have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1291 . We review the district court’s summary judgment de novo, Universal Health Servs., Inc. v. Thompson, 363 F.3d 1013 , 1019 (9th Cir.2004), and we reverse.

In this action, Savina alleges that he was terminated on account of his age, in violation of the Age Discrimination in Employment Act (ADEA), 29 U.S.C. § 621 et. seq., and an analogous Arizona statute (Arizona Act), A.R.S. § 41-1463. “We evaluate ADEA claims that are based on circumstantial evidence of discrimination by using the three-stage burden-shifting framework laid out in McDonnell Douglas Corp. v. Green.” Diaz v. Eagle Produce Ltd. P’ship, 521 F.3d 1201, 1207 (9th Cir. 2008) (citations omitted). Under this framework, Savina must first establish a prima facie case of discrimination. Id. “[T]he burden then shifts to [Reiser] to articulate a legitimate nondiscriminatory reason for its employment decision.” Wallis v. J.R. Simplot Co., 26 F.3d 885, 889 (9th…