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:T42b,MEMORANDUM Steven Cabasa appeals the district court’s order granting summary judgment to the City and County of Honolulu, Department of Environmental Services (the City) on his claim that the City retaliated against him for protected conduct in violation of the Hawaii Whistleblower Protection Act (HWPA), Haw. Rev. Stat. § 378-62 . We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291 . It is undisputed that a candidate for the Wastewater Pumping Operations Supervisor position must receive at least a 70% score on the promotional examination to be considered for the position and that Caba-sa received a 57.5% score on the examination. Accordingly, there is no genuine issue of material fact that the City would not have promoted Cabasa “regardless of the protected activity.” Crosby v. State Dep’t of Budget & Fin., 76 Haw. 332, 342 , 876 P.2d 1300 (1994) (quoting NLRB v. Howard Elec. Co., 873 F.2d 1287, 1290 (9th Cir. 1989)). AFFIRMED. This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.24:T458,

MEMORANDUM

Steven Cabasa appeals the district court’s order granting summary judgment to the City and County of Honolulu, Department of Environmental Services (the City) on his claim that the City retaliated against him for protected conduct in violation of the Hawaii Whistleblower Protection Act (HWPA), Haw. Rev. Stat. § 378-62 . We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291 .

It is undisputed that a candidate for the Wastewater Pumping Operations Supervisor position must receive at least a 70% score on the promotional examination to be considered for the position and that Caba-sa received a 57.5% score on the examination. Accordingly, there is no genuine issue of material fact that the City would not have promoted Cabasa “regardless of the protected activity.” Crosby v. State Dep’t of Budget & Fin., 76 Haw. 332, 342 , 876 P.2d 1300 (1994) (quoting NLRB v. Howard Elec. Co., 873 F.2d 1287, 1290 (9th Cir. 1989)).

AFFIRMED.

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