Thames

MEMORANDUM **

Willow P. Thames appeals the District Court’s order dismissing her fifth claim for relief as barred by the applicable statute of limitations and the District Court’s order granting LVH’s motion for summary judgment as to her remaining four claims.

The District Court committed no error in dismissing Thames’s fifth claim for relief as untimely. The claim, which alleged that Thames was terminated for engaging in union activity, was not filed within six months of the arbitrator’s decision finding that Thames was terminated for just cause. See 29 U.S.C. § 160 (b); DelCostello v. Int’l Bhd. of Teamsters, 462 U.S. 151, 155 , 103 S.Ct. 2281, 2285 , 76 L.Ed.2d 476 (1983). Furthermore, it did not relate back to the date of her original complaint. See Fed.R.Civ.P. 15(c); Percy v. San Francisco, 841 F.2d 975, 979-80 (9th Cir.1988). Accordingly, it was time-barred.

Likewise, the District Court committed no error in granting summary judgment in favor of LVH as to each of Thames’s remaining claims. In reviewing a district court’s decision to grant summary judgment, we view the evidence in the light most favorable to the nonmoving party and determine whether there are genuine…