Garland v. City of Seattle

MEMORANDUM **

Pamela Garland appeals the district court’s summary judgment on her claims of intentional discrimination pursuant to Title VII and Washington’s Law Against Discrimination, wrongful termination and gender discrimination under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 . We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1291 .

*721 We review de novo a grant of summary judgment, Balint v. Carson City, 180 F.3d 1047, 1050 (9th Cir.1999) (en banc), and we affirm for the reasons set forth in the district court’s Order granting summary judgment filed on February 8, 1999.

Garland also objects to the district court’s award of $3,172.38 in costs to the City for depositions. We review the district court’s award of costs for abuse of discretion. LSO, Ltd. v. Stroh, 205 F.3d 1146, 1157 (9th Cir.2000). The costs of obtaining depositions and copies of deposition transcripts are allowable under 28 U.S.C. § 1920 where the transcripts were reasonably necessary to the defendant’s motion for summary judgment. Alflex Corp. v. Underwriters Lab., Inc., 914 F.2d 175, 177 (9th Cir.1990). In this case, the district court awarded only “those expenses incurred by either party for a deposition actually used in support of…