Kersey

Kersey v. Costco Wholesale Corp.

Good Law
210 F. App'x 561
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitOctober 23, 2006No. 04-16893California496 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

MEMORANDUM **

Judy Kersey appeals an adverse summary judgment dismissing her third lawsuit against her former employer, Costco Wholesale Corporation (“Costco”). We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1291 , and we affirm. The parties are familiar with the facts and procedural history and so we repeat them here only as necessary.

The district court properly granted summary judgment against Kersey’s claim of retaliation under the Americans with *562 Disabilities Act of 1990 (“ADA”). 42 U.S.C. § 12203 (a). Kersey fails to establish prima facie evidence of a causal link between her prior lawsuit asserting claims under the ADA and her two subsequent suspensions and eventual termination. See Brown v. City of Tucson, 336 F.3d 1181, 1187 (9th Cir.2003) (requiring a causal link between the ADA claim and the adverse employment action). Given that Costco terminated Kersey nearly three years after she brought the suit under the ADA, we cannot infer a retaliatory motive for Kersey’s dismissal based on temporal proximity alone. See e.g., Vasquez v. County of L.A., 349 F.3d 634, 646 (9th Cir.2003) (finding no casual link where “the protected activity occurred thirteen months prior to the…

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.