May Sun v. Asian American Recovery Services, Inc.

5 F.3d 540 NOTICE: Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3 provides that dispositions other than opinions or orders designated for publication are not precedential and should not be cited except when relevant under the doctrines of law of the case, res judicata, or collateral estoppel. May SUN, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. ASIAN AMERICAN RECOVERY SERVICES, INC., Defendant-Appellee. No. 92-15067. United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit. Argued and Submitted April 14, 1993. Decided Sept. 1, 1993. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of California, No. CV-89-02671-DLJ; D. Lowell Jensen, District Judge, Presiding. N.D.Cal. AFFIRMED. Before: GOODWIN, HUG, and FLETCHER, Circuit Judges. 1 MEMORANDUM * 2 May Sun ("Sun") alleges that Asian American Recovery Services, Inc. ("AARS") terminated her from her position as a substance abuse counselor because she is a woman, in violation of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. The district court granted summary judgment in favor of AARS on the ground that Sun failed to state a prima facie case of employment discrimination. Sun appeals. 3 The district court had jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. Sec. 1331 and 42 U.S.C. Sec.…