R. Dan Bergan v. Standard Duplicating MacHines Corporation, a Massachusetts Corporation

91 F.3d 150 NOTICE: Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3 provides that dispositions other than opinions or orders designated for publication are not precedential and should not be cited except when relevant under the doctrines of law of the case, res judicata, or collateral estoppel. R. Dan BERGAN, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. STANDARD DUPLICATING MACHINES CORPORATION, a Massachusetts corporation, Defendant-Appellee. No. 95-35364. United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit. Argued and Submitted July 12, 1996. Decided July 29, 1996. 1 Before: FERGUSON and BRUNETTI, Circuit Judges, and KING, * District Judge. 2 MEMORANDUM ** 3 R. Dan Bergan ("Bergan") filed suit pursuant to the Age Discrimination in Employment Act ("ADEA"), 29 U.S.C. §§ 621-634 . Bergan appeals the district court's grant of summary judgment in favor of his former employer Standard Duplicating Machines Corporation ("Standard"). The district court concluded that there was no genuine issue of material fact regarding Standard's allegedly pretextual reasons for firing Bergan. We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1291 and we affirm. 4 A grant of summary judgment is reviewed de novo. Jesinger v. Nevada Fed. Credit…