Sarver
Sarver v. Travelcenters of America Inc.
Opinion
Lead Opinion
MEMORANDUM **
Kevin Sarver appeals the district court’s grant of summary judgment to TravelCen-ters of America (“TCA”) and its order denying Sarver’s motion for reconsideration. We affirm.
We review de novo a district court’s grant of summary judgment, Margolis v. Ryan, 140 F.3d 850, 852 (9th Cir.1998), and its denial of a motion for reconsideration for abuse of discretion. See MacDonald v. Grace Church Seattle, 457 F.3d 1079, 1081 (9th Cir.2006).
To prevail on a claim of negligence under California law, “[a] plaintiff must show *461 that [the] defendant ] owed [him] a legal duty, that [the defendant] breached the duty, and that the breach was a proximate or legal cause of [his] injuries.” Saelzler v. Advanced Growp 400, 25 Cal.4th 763 , 107 Cal.Rptr.2d 617 , 28 P.3d 1143, 1145 (2001) (quoting Sharon P. v. Arman, Ltd., 21 Cal.4th 1181 , 91 Cal.Rptr.2d 35 , 989 P.2d 121, 125 (1999)). Summary judgment is proper “if the pleadings, the discovery and disclosure materials on file, and any affidavits show that there is no genuine issue as to any material fact and that the movant is entitled to judgment as a matter of law.” Fed. R. Civ. Pro. 56(c).