Douglas Scheitlin v. Freescale Semiconductor, Inc.

Good Law
465 F. App'x 698
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitJanuary 10, 201210-16347California347 words

Opinion

Opinion

MEMORANDUM

Douglas Scheitlin appeals the district court’s dismissal on summary judgment of his claim that he was terminated by Frees-cale Semiconductor, Inc. (“Freeseale”) in violation of the Age Discrimination in Employment Act (“ADEA”). As the facts and procedural history are familiar to the parties, we do not recite them here except as necessary to explain our decision. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291 , and we review the district court’s grant of summary judgment de novo. Gordon v. Virtumundo, Inc., 575 F.3d 1040, 1047 (9th Cir.2009). We affirm the decision of the district court.

Under the ADEA, the plaintiff bears the burden of proving that “age was the ‘but-for’ cause of the challenged adverse employment action.” Gross v. FBL Fin. Servs., Inc., 557 U.S. 167, 129 S.Ct. 2343, 2352 (2009). The district court properly concluded that Scheitlin failed to raise a genuine issue of material fact in either his age discrimination or retaliation claim.

As the district court recognized, nothing in the record supports Scheitliris assertion that the employee selected to replace him was unqualified to assume his position. Scheitlin’s “subjective personal judgments of [his]…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.