Jerry Hill v. Rand Beers

MEMORANDUM

Jerry Hill appeals an adverse judgment on his claim under the Age Discrimination in Employment Act (ADEA). We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291 , and we affirm.

To establish a prima facie case of failure to hire on the basis of age under the ADEA, plaintiffs must demonstrate they were within the protected class of individuals, they applied for a position for which they were qualified and a younger person with similar qualifications was hired for the position. See Cotton v. City of Alameda, 812 F.2d 1245, 1248 (9th Cir. 1987).

Hill’s challenge to the agency’s June 27, 2007 decision to advertise the position faüs. The June 27 decision was not a hiring decision but an interim step in the overall hiring process. It was not therefore a separately actionable adverse employment action under the ADEA. Cf. Brooks v. City of San Mateo, 229 F.3d 917, 929-30 (9th Cir. 2000) (holding a negative performance evaluation “was not an adverse employment action because it was subject to modification by the city”).

Hill’s challenge to the government’s ultimate hiring decision fails because he neither applied for the position nor presented evidence from which a reasonable jury…