Ganquan Xie v. Lawrence Berkeley Laboratory
Opinion
Lead Opinion
MEMORANDUM **
Ganquan Xie appeals pro se from the district court’s summary judgment in favor of the Regents of the University of California (“the Regents”), and the district court’s order denying reconsideration, in his action alleging race, national origin, age, and disability discrimination and retaliation. We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1291 . We review the district court’s summary judgment de novo, Palmer v. Pioneer Inn Assocs., Ltd., 338 F.3d 981, 984 (9th Cir.2003), and review the denial of the motion for reconsideration for abuse of discretion, M2 Software, Inc. v. Madacy *15 Entm’t, 421 F.3d 1073 , 1086 (9th Cir.2005). We affirm.
The district court properly concluded that Xie failed to establish a prima facie case of discrimination. See Fonseca v. Sysco Food Sews, of Arizona, Inc., 374 F.3d 840, 847 (9th Cir.2004) (listing elements of prima facie case in Title VII action); Coleman v. Quaker Oats Co., 232 F.3d 1271, 1281 (9th Cir.2000) (prima facie case under Age Discrimination in Employment Act); Allen v. Pacific Bell, 348 F.3d 1113, 1114 (9th Cir.2003) (per curiam) (prima facie case under Americans with Disabilities Act (“ADA”)). In the multiple…