Glenn Marr v. Peter Anderson

Good Law
374 F. App'x 703
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitMarch 12, 201009-15614California511 words

Opinion

Opinion

MEMORANDUM

Glenn Marr appeals from the district court’s grant of summary judgment. We affirm. Because the parties are familiar with the facts and procedural history, we will not recount it here.

I

Marr fails to make any arguments in the opening brief specifically challenging the district court’s grant of summary judgment with regard to defendants Biaggi, Dondero, Ashworth, Mendenhall, and Wulfkuhle. “Issues raised in a brief that are not supported by argument are deemed abandoned.” Leer v. Murphy, 844 F.2d 628, 634 (9th Cir.1988). Therefore, we affirm the district court’s grant of summary judgment as to these defendants.

II

The district court did not err in granting summary judgment on Marr’s claims against defendants Anderson and Canniz-zaro. To establish his retaliation claims, Marr must show: (1) he engaged in expressive conduct that addressed a matter of public concern; (2) defendants, as government officials, took an adverse action against him; and (3) plaintiffs expressive conduct was a substantial or motivating factor for the adverse action. Alpha Energy Savers, Inc. v. Hansen, 381 F.3d 917, 923 (9th Cir.2004). Finally, even if Marr proves all three elements of Apha…

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.