Daniel Love v. Harsh Investment Corporation

983 F.2d 1076 NOTICE: Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3 provides that dispositions other than opinions or orders designated for publication are not precedential and should not be cited except when relevant under the doctrines of law of the case, res judicata, or collateral estoppel. Daniel LOVE, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. HARSH INVESTMENT CORPORATION, Defendant-Appellee. No. 92-35394. United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit. Submitted Jan. 6, 1993. * Decided Jan. 12, 1993. Before REINHARDT, CYNTHIA HOLCOMB HALL and LEAVY, Circuit Judges. 1 MEMORANDUM ** 2 Daniel Love appeals pro se the district court's order granting Harsh Investment Corp.'s motion for summary judgment in an action alleging race and sex discrimination under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, 42 U.S.C. § 2000e et seq. Love contends that he did not receive adequate notice of his right to sue or, in the alternative, his delay in filing suit should be subject to equitable tolling. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291 , and we affirm. 3 We review de novo a grant of summary judgment to determine whether, viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to the nonmoving party, there are any genuine…