Brown

MEMORANDUM **

William D. Brown (“Brown”) appeals the district court’s summary adjudication of his wrongful termination claim, his breach of contract claim involving incentive compensation that he allegedly earned prior to his termination, and the exclusion of evidence at trial of Sprint United Management’s (“Sprint”) purported motivation for terminating his employment. The facts *2 underlying this action are known to the parties and need not be recited. We affirm.

The district court did not err in summarily adjudicating Brown’s wrongful discharge claim. It is undisputed Brown was an at-will employee. Under Nevada law, an at-will employee has no cognizable “bad faith” discharge claim, and Brown did not carry his burden to show his discharge violated Nevada public policy. See Allum v. Valley Bank of Nevada, 114 Nev. 1313 , 970 P.2d 1062 (1998); D’Angelo v. Gardner, 107 Nev. 704 , 819 P.2d 206 (1991). To the extent Brown argues that Sprint’s Compensation Plan itself violates Nevada public policy, he did not put the Plan terms at issue in the district court, and he may not raise the argument for the first time on appeal. See Abogados v. AT&T, Inc., 223 F.3d 932, 937 (9th…