Ogunsalu
Ogunsalu v. Roadway Express, Inc.
Opinion
Lead Opinion
MEMORANDUM **
Cornelius O. Ogunsalu appeals pro se the district court’s summary judgment and denial of motions for reconsideration in his employment discrimination action. We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1291 . We review summary judgment de novo and reconsideration orders for an abuse of discretion. Ray v. Henderson, 217 F.3d 1234, 1239 (9th Cir.2000); Sch. Dist. No. 1J v. ACandS, Inc., 5 F.3d 1255 , 1262 (9th Cir.1993). We affirm.
The district court properly determined that Ogunsalu failed to set forth a prima facie case of employment discrimination because he failed to present evidence sufficient to create a genuine issue of material fact that he had performed his job satisfactorily. See Llamas v. Butte Cmty. Coll. Dist., 238 F.3d 1123 , 1126 (9th Cir.2001) (stating that if employee can not establish prima facie case of disparate treatment, summary judgment is appropriate); see also Fed.R.Civ.P. 56(c) & (e) (requiring factual opposition to summary judgment to be made by affidavit). Similarly, summary judgment was proper on Ogunsalu’s retaliation claim because he did not present admissible evidence showing that he engaged in a protected activity prior to his…