Lori McGrath v. State of Nevada Department Of

MEMORANDUM

Lori McGrath appeals from the district court’s judgment and asserts that the district court erred when it granted summary judgment against her and in favor of the State of Nevada, Department of Public Safety, Nevada Highway Patrol (“NHP”). We affirm.

(1) McGrath asserts that the district court erred when it determined that she had not spelled out a prima facie case for retaliation pursuant to the retaliation provisions of Title VII for events before she filed a complaint with the Nevada Equal Rights Commission and EEOC (collectively “NERC”) in January of 2002. We disagree. McGrath could not spell out a case unless NHP subjected her to an adverse employment action after she had engaged in a protected activity. See Nilsson v. City of Mesa, 503 F.3d 947, 953-54 (9th Cir.2007). The record shows that prior to the 2002 filing she had not opposed any alleged discriminatory practice by NHP. See Raad v. Fairbanks N. Star Borough Sch. Dist., 323 F.3d 1185, 1197 (9th Cir.2003); see also Crawford v. Metro. Gov’t of Nashville & Davidson County, — U.S. -, 129 S.Ct. 846, 850 , 172 L.Ed.2d 650 (2009). That, by the way, includes her claim that the State Attorney General refused to…