William E. H. TAGUPA, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. BOARD OF DIRECTORS, Research Corp., University of Hawaii, Defendants-Appellees

Good Law
633 F.2d 1309·25 Empl. Prac. Dec. (CCH) 31,701·27 Fair Empl. Prac. Cas. (BNA) 1041·1980 U.S. App. LEXIS 11487
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitDecember 12, 198079-4278California1,284 words

Opinion

Opinion

Fletcher, J.

William Tagupa appeals from the trial court’s grant of summary judgment against him in his employment discrimination suit brought under 42 U.S.C. §§ 1981 and 1983. We affirm.

Tagupa responded to defendants’ advertisement of a job opening, but was subsequently rejected.

The central issue of this appeal is whether Tagupa completed the application process. Defendants contend that Tagupa never gave them information specifically addressing the advertised qualifications for the job and was rejected for that reason.

A grant of summary judgment will be affirmed when the record, viewed most charitably to the non-movant, shows that there are no genuine issues of material fact and that the movant is entitled to judgment as a matter of law. Garter-Bare Co. v. Munsingwear, Inc., 622 F.2d 416 (9th Cir. 1980).

We think that the materials submitted by the litigants have resolved all doubts as to the circumstances surrounding Tagupa’s solicitation of employment. We conclude that Tagupa failed to apply for the position, within the meaning of the guidelines laid down in McDonnell Douglas Corp. v. Green, 411 U.S. 792 , 93 S.Ct. 1817 , 36 L.Ed.2d 668 (1973). Therefore, defendants are entitled to…

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.