Rash B. Ghosh v. California Department of Health Services California State Personnel Board Howard Hatayama

50 F.3d 14 NOTICE: Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3 provides that dispositions other than opinions or orders designated for publication are not precedential and should not be cited except when relevant under the doctrines of law of the case, res judicata, or collateral estoppel. Rash B. GHOSH, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH SERVICES; California State Personnel Board; Howard Hatayama, et al., Defendants-Appellees. No. 94-15098. United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit. Submitted March 7, 1995. * Decided March 9, 1995. IN PART, VACATED AND REMANDED IN PART. Before: SNEED, POOLE and BRUNETTI, Circuit Judges. 1 MEMORANDUM ** 2 Rash B. Ghosh appeals the district court's dismissal for failure to state a claim of his action under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, 42 U.S.C. Sec. 2000e against the California Department of Health Services ("CDHS"), California State Personnel Board, Riccardo Notini, Susan Solarz, Howard Hatayama and Mike James ("defendants"). Ghosh alleged that defendants intentionally discriminated against him on the basis of race and national origin by demoting him, harassing him, and denying him employment opportunities. Ghosh also challenges…