Sandoval

AMENDED MEMORANDUM *

1. Sandoval presented sufficient evidence that the Secretary discriminated against him by failing to upgrade his position. He was eligible for an upgrade after December 1, 1992; an upgrade was available for his position until January 8, 1993; and all other employees in similar positions were classified at the upgraded level. Because a moratorium on upgrades only took effect on January 8, it did not dispel the inference of discriminatory treatment prior to that date.

Additionally, Sandoval showed that similarly situated employees received supervisory assignments and participated in the rotation program. The Secretary offered legitimate nondiscriminatory reasons to explain this difference in treatment, but Sandoval presented evidence that permitted a strong inference of pretext. See Warren v. City of Carlsbad, 58 F.3d 439, 443 (9th Cir.1995); Mangold v. California Pub. Util. Comm’n, 67 F.3d 1470 , 1477 (9th Cir.1995). Viewed in the light most favorable to Sandoval, the evidence sup *467 ports the jury's verdict and the district court did not err in denying judgment as a matter of law to the Secretary on Sandoval’s discrimination claims. See Omega Envtl, Inc.…