Allen
Allen v. County of Santa Clara
Opinion
Lead Opinion
MEMORANDUM *
Sean Allen appeals the district court’s grant of summary judgment to the defendants. We affirm. Because the parties are familiar with the factual and procedural history of the case, we will not recount it here. We review the district court’s decision to grant summary judgment de novo. Lindahl v. Air France, 930 F.2d 1434, 1436 (9th Cir.1991). We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1291 . Under the circumstances presented by the case, we have appellate jurisdiction over the appeal. See FirsTier Mortgage Co. v. Investors Mortgage Ins. Co., 498 U.S. 269, 276 , 111 S.Ct. 648 , 112 L.Ed.2d 743 (1991).
I
The district court did not err in granting summary judgment on Allen’s discrimination claims brought pursuant to Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, 42 U.S.C. § 2000e(2). The district court held that Allen’s Title VII claims arising from the County’s refusal to hire him in 2000 were time-barred. A plaintiff seeking relief under Title VII must file a charge with the EEOC within 180 days “after the alleged unlawful employment practice occurred.” 42 U.S.C. § 2000e-5(e)(l). Where the plaintiff first seeks relief with a state or local agency, as Allen did in this…