Danielle Pranger v. Oregon State University

Good Law
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitJuly 8, 202423-35393California875 words

Opinion

Opinion

NOT FOR PUBLICATION FILED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS JUL 8 2024

MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK

U.S. COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

DANIELLE PRANGER; GARRETT No. 23-35393 HARRIS, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated, D.C. No. 3:21-cv-00656-HZ

Plaintiffs-Appellants,

MEMORANDUM*

v.

OREGON STATE UNIVERSITY, a public body of the State of Oregon,

Defendant-Appellee.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Oregon Marco A. Hernandez, Chief District Judge, Presiding

Argued and Submitted June 3, 2024 Portland, Oregon

Before: RAWLINSON, FORREST, and SUNG, Circuit Judges.

Danielle Pranger (Pranger) and Garrett Harris (Harris) appeal the district

court’s grant of summary judgment in favor of Oregon State University (OSU) on

their breach of contract claim. Pranger and Harris also contend that the district

court abused its discretion when it denied their request for additional discovery.

* This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3. We have jurisdiction…

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.