Cpuc

MEMORANDUM

Donna Hines appeals pro se from the district court’s judgment in her employment action against the California Public Utilities Commission (“CPUC”) and other defendants. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291 . We review de novo both a grant of summary judgment and a dismissal for failure to state a claim. Barnett v. Centoni, 81 F.3d 813, 815-16 (9th Cir.1994) (per curiam). We affirm.

The district court properly granted summary judgment on the Title VII race discrimination claim because Hines failed to raise a genuine dispute of 'material fact as to whether the CPUC’s legitimate, nondiscriminatory reasons for not selecting Hines for promotions were pretextual. See Villiarimo v. Aloha Island Air, Inc., 281 F.3d 1054, 1062-63 (9th Cir.2002).

The district court properly granted summary judgment on the Title VII retaliation claim because Hines failed to raise a genuine dispute of material fact as to whether she suffered an adverse employment action in retaliation for filing the instant lawsuit, or as to whether there was a causal link between the lawsuit and the alleged adverse employment action. See id. at 1064 .

The district court properly dismissed the racial…