David Kunz v. Smith's Food & Drug Centers Inc.

MEMORANDUM

David Kunz appeals pro se from the district court’s order granting summary judgment in his employment action that alleged, among other things, discrimination, hostile work environment, and retaliation in violation of Title VII and the Age Discrimination in Employment Act (“ADEA”). He also appeals from the district court’s orders denying his motion to produce requested information, motions to add witness, and motion for appointment of counsel. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291 , we affirm.

We review de novo a grant of summary judgment. Beene v. Terhune, 380 F.3d 1149, 1150 (9th Cir.2004). We review for abuse of discretion the district court’s denial of plaintiff’s motions to produce requested information and to add witness, Johnson v. Mammoth Recreations, Inc., 975 F.2d 604, 607 (9th Cir.1992), and the district court’s denial of plaintiff’s motion for appointment of counsel. Johnson v. U.S. Treasury Dept., 27 F.3d 415, 417 (9th Cir.1994). We affirm.

The district court properly granted summary judgment on Kunz’s age discrimination claim. Because Kunz failed to timely file a charge of discrimination, only his constructive discharge claim is timely. Nat’l R.R.…