Norman Dillard v. Hyatt Corporation

MEMORANDUM

Norman Dillard appeals from the district court’s order granting summary judgment to Hyatt Corporation on his claims of employment discrimination on account of race, age and disability. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291 , and we affirm the district court’s judgment.

1.With respect to his race discrimination claim, Dillard has not met his burden of producing specific and substantial evidence that Hyatt’s stated reason for terminating him—his failure to adequately supervise his subordinate’s company credit card purchases—was “untrue or pretextual.” Dep’t of Fair Emp’t & Hous. v. Lucent Techs., Inc., 642 F.3d 728, 746 (9th Cir. 2011) (quoting Hanson v. Lucky Stores, Inc., 74 Cal.App.4th 215 , 87 Cal. Rptr.2d 487, 493 (1999)). The statistical evidence he produced is not sufficient to defeat summary judgment, whether considered alone or in the context of his other evidence. See Aragon v. Republic Silver State Disposal, Inc., 292 F.3d 654, 663-64 (9th Cir. 2002). Quite simply, Dillard did not produce evidence that demonstrates “such weaknesses, implausibilities, inconsistencies, incoherencies, or contradictions in the employer’s proffered legitimate reasons for its…