Rhonda Wilkinson v. Clark County School District
Opinion
Opinion
MEMORANDUM
Rhonda Wilkinson appeals pro se from the district court’s judgment dismissing without prejudice her action against the Clark County School District for employment retaliation and racial discrimination. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291 . We review the district court’s order de novo, Cholla Ready Mix, Inc. v. Civish, 382 F.3d 969, 973 (9th Cir.2004), and we affirm.
The district court properly dismissed Wilkinson’s retaliation claim related to her May 2007 performance evaluation because it was time barred. See Payan v. Aramark Mgm’t Servs. L.P., 495 F.3d 1119, 1121 (9th Cir.2007) (“If a litigant does not file suit within ninety day ‘[of] the date EEOC dismisses a claim,’ then the action is time barred.” (citation omitted)).
Dismissal of Wilkinson’s retaliation claim related to her October 2007 grievance hearing was proper because her allegations were insufficient to state a claim. See Brooks v. City of San Mateo, 229 F.3d 917, 928 (9th Cir.2000) (in order to state a retaliation claim, plaintiff must allege an adverse employment action); Nunez v. City of Los Angeles, 147 F.3d 867, 875 (9th Cir.2000) (harsh words or threats do not constitute a materially…