Woods

Woods v. Bayer Healthcare

Good Law
281 F. App'x 677
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitJune 2, 2008No. 06-16529California901 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

MEMORANDUM *

This is an employment discrimination case. Nathaniel Woods, Jr. worked for Bayer Healthcare, and Woods contends he was not given opportunities to advance because of his race. Woods claims he suffered from race discrimination, retaliation, a hostile work environment, and constructive discharge. Bayer moved for summary judgment on all claims. The *678 district court granted Bayer’s motion for summary judgment, and Woods appeals. We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1291 , and we affirm the district court.

We review a grant or denial of a motion for summary judgment de novo. Welles v. Turner Entm’t Co., 503 F.3d 728, 733 (9th Cir.2007). We view the case in the light most favorable to Woods and consider whether there are any genuine issues of material fact and whether Bayer was entitled to judgment as a matter of law. See id.; Fed.R.Civ.P. 56(c).

To avoid summary judgment, Woods needs to show that (i) he belonged to a racial minority; (ii) he requested and was qualified for training and advancement; (iii) despite his qualifications, he was denied training and advancement; and (iv) after this denial, Bayer continued to train and advance applicants from persons…

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.