Terry Doubt v. Ncr Corp.

MEMORANDUM

Plaintiff Terry Doubt appeals from the district court’s grant of summary judgment to Defendant NCR Corporation. We. have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1291 , and we affirm. As the parties are familiar with the facts, we do not recount them here.

1. The district court did not err in granting summary judgment to NCR on Doubt’s claim for age discrimination on the basis of disparate treatment. Doubt’s disparate treatment claim fails because he failed to produce any evidence of intentional discrimination on the basis of age. Guz v. Bechtel Nat'l Inc., 24 Cal.4th 317 , 100 Cal.Rptr.2d 352 , 8 P.3d 1089 , 1113 n.20 (2000).

2. Doubt failed to meet his burden to defeat summary judgment for NCR on his claim for age discrimination on the basis of disparate impact. Pursuant to the California Fair Employment and Housing Act (“FEHA”), courts are instructed to “interpret the state’s statutes prohibiting age discrimination in employment broadly and vigorously ..., and with the goal of ... protecting older workers as a group....” Cal. Gov’t Code § 12941. Notably, California makes clear that “the use of salary as the basis for differentiating between employees when terminating…