Tipaksorn Tungjunyatham v. Mike Johanns

Good Law
500 F. App'x 686
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitDecember 14, 201211-16170California1,416 words

Opinion

Opinion

MEMORANDUM

Dr. Tipaksorn Tungjunyatham (“Dr. Tung,” as she refers to herself in her pro se brief), an Asian-Pacific female, appeals the district court’s grant of summary judgment in favor of the United States Department of Agriculture (“USDA”) on her claims arising under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, 42 U.S.C. § 2000e-16. Dr. Tung also appeals the district court’s grant of summary judgment in favor of the USDA on her claim that the Agency violated her rights under the Privacy Act of 1974, 5 U.S.C. § 552a(b). We review a district court’s grant of summary judgment de novo. Surrell v. California Water Service Co., 518 F.3d 1097, 1103 (9th Cir.2008). Summary judgment is appropriate when there is no genuine issue as to any material fact and the moving party is entitled to judgment as a matter of law. Fed.R.Civ.P. 56(a). The district court’s grant of summary judgment may be affirmed “on any ground supported by the record.” Schmidt v. Contra Costa County, 693 F.3d 1122, 1132 (9th Cir.2012). We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291 , and we affirm.

Dr. Tung claims that the district court erred by granting summary judgment in favor of the USDA on her failure to promote…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.