James

James v. C-Tran

Good Law
130 F. App'x 156
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitMay 3, 2005No. 03-35934California491 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

MEMORANDUM *

Charles James appeals the district court’s summary judgment in favor of C-TRAN and its executive director, Lynne Griffith, in James’s race discrimination action. We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1291 , review the district court’s grant of summary judgment de novo, Porter v. Cal. Dep’t. of Corr., 383 F.3d 1018, 1024 (9th Cir.2004), and affirm.

James argues that the district court improperly granted summary judgment on his claim that C-TRAN terminated him in retaliation for reporting discrimination. To establish a prima facie case of retaliation, James must show that: (1) he engaged in a protected activity, (2) C-TRAN subjected him to an adverse employment action and (3) a causal link exists between the protected activity and the adverse action. Hernandez v. Spacelabs Med. Inc., 343 F.3d 1107, 1113 (9th Cir.2003). The district court did not err in holding that James could not establish either that the performance improvement plan training was an adverse employment action or that James could not establish a causal link between his report of discrimination and termination.

Adverse employment actions include “actions that materially affect[ ] compensation,…

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.