Rekhter

Rekhter v. Central Park East Ltd. Partnership

Good Law
31 F. App'x 506
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitMarch 13, 2002No. 00-35741; D.C. No. CV-99-00461-BJRCalifornia141 words

Lead Opinion

MEMORANDUM ***

Ms. Rekhter, pro se, appeals from a summary judgment dismissing her claims under 42 U.S.C. § 3604 (2000). Ms. Rekhter has not raised a genuine issue of fact whether the defendants discriminated against her on the basis of any protected status, 1 nor has she raised a genuine issue whether the defendants’ policy had a significantly adverse or disproportionate impact on persons of a particular group. 2 Summary judgment was proper. 3

AFFIRMED.

jjjjg disposition is not appropriate for publication and may not be cited to or by the courts of this circuit except as may be provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.

. See Harris v. Itzhaki, 183 F.3d 1043, 1051 (9th Cir. 1999).

. See Pfaff v. United States Department of Housing, 88 F.3d 739, 745 (9th Cir. 1996).

. See Harris, 183 F.3d at 1051 .