Townsend

MEMORANDUM **

Marland Townsend, a former Nike part-time employee, appeals the district court’s judgment following a jury trial in his Title VII, 42 U.S.C. § 2000e-2(a), action alleging racial discrimination by Nike when he was not selected for a full-time position. On appeal he asserts that the district court erred in giving a “sole factor” jury instruction, in fading to submit the issue of punitive damages to the jury, and in three evidentiary rulings. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291 , and we affirm.

The district court’s determination that the evidence did not support a mixed motive instruction was not an abuse of discretion because this case was tried as an either/or case. At trial, Nike asserted that Townsend did not get the promotion because of his low interview scores and Townsend sought to show that this reason was pretextual with evidence that Nike did not follow internal hiring procedures, that the hiring managers had preselected winning candidates, and that Nike employees had a bias against African-Americans. Townsend’s opening statement explained that “there’s going to be testimony in this case from two managers that this whole process that resulted in Mr.…