Dilip Mukherjee v. Sheraton-Palace Hotel

46 F.3d 1143 NOTICE: Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3 provides that dispositions other than opinions or orders designated for publication are not precedential and should not be cited except when relevant under the doctrines of law of the case, res judicata, or collateral estoppel. Dilip MUKHERJEE, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. SHERATON-PALACE HOTEL, Defendant-Appellee. No. 94-15876. United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit. Submitted Dec. 19, 1994. * Decided Jan. 10, 1995. Before: SNEED, D.W. NELSON and TROTT, Circuit Judges. 1 MEMORANDUM ** 2 Dilip Kumar Mukherjee appeals pro se the district court's summary judgment for defendant Sheraton Palace Hotel ("Hotel") in Mukherjee's civil rights action under 42 U.S.C. Sec. 2000e et seq. ("Title VII"). Mukherjee alleged that the former Assistant Director of Human Resources at the Hotel discriminated against him on the basis of national origin by terminating his employment as a busboy in the Hotel's Garden Court Restaurant. Mukherjee also alleged that he was terminated in retaliation for lodging complaints against various employees of the Hotel. We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. Sec. 1291 , and we affirm. 3 We review de novo the district…