Hoeft-Ross

MEMORANDUM *

Monica Hoeft-Ross, Hiawatha HoeftRoss (Monica’s husband), and their children, Kirsten and Martin Hoeft-Ross (collectively referred to as “appellants”), *222 brought an action against Monica s parents, Werner and Christel Hoeft (the “Hoefts”) under the Fair Housing Act and 42 U.S.C. §§ 1981 ,1982, and 1985. Appellants now appeal all of the district court’s decision, except the summary judgment order for the Fair Housing Act and 42 U.S.C. § 1985 claims. We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1291 , and we affirm.

1. As to the summary judgment motion, appellants argue there was sufficient evidence to defeat the motion. We disagree. The court reviews de novo a district court’s decision to grant summary judgment. Universal Health Servs., Inc. v. Thompson, 363 F.3d 1013 , 1019 (9th Cir.2004). Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 56(c) articulates the familiar standard: summary judgment is appropriate “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 that the movant is entitled to judgment as a matter of law.” In order to rebut a party’s motion for summary judgment, the…