Hillside Drilling Inc. v. City of Berkeley

MEMORANDUM **

Hillside Drilling, Inc. appeals the grant of summary judgment against its claim that the City of Berkeley’s Disadvantaged Business Enterprises (“DBE”) program, as applied, imposes an unconstitutional strict quota system. 1 The district court found no basis for municipal liability. The relevant facts are known to the parties and are discussed here only briefly and as necessary. We review the grant of summary *856 judgment de novo, and we affirm. Oliver v. Keller, 289 F.3d 623, 626 (9th Cir.2002).

Hillside contends that Berkeley has an official, though unwritten, policy imposing a quota and that its stated reason for rejecting Hillside’s bid is pretext. Berkeley’s Bidder-DBE-Information form is confusing and arguably misleading when read without the benefit of the requirements made very explicit in the project specifications. However, this confusion cannot support a reasonable inference that the requirement is pretext. Moreover, no reasonable inference of a quota system may be drawn from the prior contracts awarded, Kenneth Emeziem’s deposition testimony, or Berkeley’s willingness to waive the requirement in single-bidder situations where doing so is necessary to…