Karen E. Naberhaus v. Chemed Corporation Dubois Chemical Co., Inc.

972 F.2d 1341 NOTICE: Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3 provides that dispositions other than opinions or orders designated for publication are not precedential and should not be cited except when relevant under the doctrines of law of the case, res judicata, or collateral estoppel. Karen E. NABERHAUS, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. CHEMED CORPORATION; Dubois Chemical Co., Inc., Defendant-Appellee. No. 91-15076. United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit. Argued and Submitted February 14, 1992. Decided Aug. 12, 1992. Before GOODWIN, FARRIS and POOLE, Circuit Judges. 1 MEMORANDUM * OVERVIEW 2 Karen Naberhaus appeals the district court's judgment denying her Title VII sex discrimination claim against her former employer, DuBois Chemical, for terminating her. The district court held that Naberhaus failed to establish a prima facie case of sex discrimination under either disparate treatment analyses, pretext ("McDonnell Douglas/Burdine "), or mixed motive ("Price Waterhouse ") in DuBois' decision to terminate her. Naberhaus argues that the district court's factual findings supporting its holding are clearly erroneous. We have jurisdiction, 28 U.S.C. § 1291 , and we affirm. FACTS AND…