Charlie Dang v. Solar Turbines Inc.

MEMORANDUM

Charlie T. Dang appeals pro se from the district court’s summary judgment in his employment action alleging discrimination, harassment, retaliation and failure to accommodate in violation of federal and state law. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291 . We review de novo, Bias v. Moynihan, 508 F.3d 1212, 1218 (9th Cir.2007), and we affirm.

The district court properly granted summary judgment on Dang’s claims under Title VII, the Age Discrimination and Employment Act, and the California Fair Employment and Housing Act (“FEHA”) because Dang failed to exhaust his administrative remedies. See B.K.B. v. Maui Police Dep’t, 276 F.3d 1091, 1099-1100 (9th Cir.2002) (allegations omitted from an Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (“EEOC”) charge generally may not be considered by a federal court); Martin v. Lockheed Missiles & Space Co., 29 Cal.App.4th 1718 , 35 Cal.Rptr.2d 181, 184 (Ct.App.1994) (EEOC right-to-sue notice does not satisfy administrative exhaustion requirements for the California FEHA).

The district court properly granted summary judgment on Dang’s disability discrimination, retaliation and failure to accommodate claims because Dang failed to present…