Dickason

Dickason v. Potter

Good Law
324 F. App'x 651
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitApril 28, 2009No. 07-15438California304 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

MEMORANDUM **

When proceeding under McDonnell Douglas, a plaintiff must first establish a prima facie case of discrimination. “If a prima facie case of discrimination is established, the burden shifts to the defendant to articulate a legitimate nondiscriminatory reason for its employment decision. Then, in order to prevail, the plaintiff must demonstrate that the employer’s alleged reason for the adverse employment decision is a pretext for another motive which is discriminatory.” Wallis v. J.R. Simplot Co., 26 F.3d 885, 889 (9th Cir.1994) (citations omitted); see also McDonnell Douglas Corp. v. Green, 411 U.S. 792, 802-05 , 93 S.Ct. 1817 , 36 L.Ed.2d 668 (1973).

We find no error in the district court’s determination that Dickason failed to establish a prima facie case of age discrimination. Specifically, Dickason has not shown how the Postal Service’s asserted discovery behavior created an inference of age discrimination. Additionally, Dickason now argues that there was evidence that persons younger than he were reinstated to a position that Dickason sought and was qualified for — the position of clerk. Dieka- *652 son did not raise this argument to the district court. We see…

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.