22:I[98912,["/_next/static/chunks/0asocxi83kb~5.js","/_next/static/chunks/0n4z.7yu76je-.js","/_next/static/chunks/0eyt_ou8dj52g.js","/_next/static/chunks/01bcia3bjqt9z.js","/_next/static/chunks/15egrlmmf_yst.js"],"CaseDetailGate"] 23:T41f,MEMORANDUM Jimmy Kuang appeals the district court’s order granting Bel Air Mart’s motion for summary judgment. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291 . Even if Huang’s declaration and attachments were admissible, the district court did not err in dismissing Kuang’s claim for breach of the Collective Bargaining Agreement (CBA), because Kuang failed to exhaust the grievance procedures required by the CBA. See Vaca v. Sipes, 386 U.S. 171, 184 , 87 S.Ct. 903 , 17 L.Ed.2d 842 (1967). Because Kuang informed the district court, both orally and in his written submissions, that he waived the argument that his failure to exhaust was excused due to the union’s breach of its duty of fair representation, this argument is waived on appeal and we do not reach it. See Blaisdell v. Frappiea, 729 F.3d 1237, 1241-42 (9th Cir. 2013). Because Kuang waived his hybrid claim, we do not reach his remaining arguments. AFFIRMED. This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.24:T44c,

MEMORANDUM

Jimmy Kuang appeals the district court’s order granting Bel Air Mart’s motion for summary judgment. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291 .

Even if Huang’s declaration and attachments were admissible, the district court did not err in dismissing Kuang’s claim for breach of the Collective Bargaining Agreement (CBA), because Kuang failed to exhaust the grievance procedures required by the CBA. See Vaca v. Sipes, 386 U.S. 171, 184 , 87 S.Ct. 903 , 17 L.Ed.2d 842 (1967). Because Kuang informed the district court, both orally and in his written submissions, that he waived the argument that his failure to exhaust was excused due to the union’s breach of its duty of fair representation, this argument is waived on appeal and we do not reach it. See Blaisdell v. Frappiea, 729 F.3d 1237, 1241-42 (9th Cir. 2013). Because Kuang waived his hybrid claim, we do not reach his remaining arguments.

AFFIRMED.

This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.