Sangster

MEMORANDUM

Appellant Robert Sangster (Sangster) appeals a judgment by the district court granting summary judgment to Sverdrup Civil, Inc. (Sverdrup) in a diversity action. Sangster alleged that when Sverdrup transferred him out of a San Diego project after concluding he had committed sexual harassment, the company violated the California Fair Employment and Housing Act (“FEHA”), breached an implied-in-fact contract not to terminate without good cause, and breached an implied covenant of good faith and fair dealing. Sangster was transferred without loss of salary or benefits. It is unclear from the record what damages Sangster claims he suffered because he did not submit his original complaint.

The district court had jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1332 (a). We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291 . A grant of a motion for summary judgment is reviewed de novo. Delta Savings Bank v. United States, 265 F.3d 1017, 1021 (9th Cir.2001). We hold that the district court did not err in granting Sverdrup’s motion for summary judgment.

The basic facts have already been set forth by both parties in their briefs.

Summary judgment was proper as to Sangster’s FEHA claim because…