Case ID: f-appx_676/html/0639-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

William HERRON, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. PERI & SONS FARMS, INC., Defendant-Appellee.
    No. 14-16134
    United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.
    Submitted February 9, 2017  San Francisco, California
    Filed FEBRUARY 13, 2017
    Day R. Williams, Esquire, Attorney, Day R. Williams, Attorney at Law, Carson City, NV, for Plaintiff-Appellant
    Robert C. Huntington, Esquire, Attorney, Holland & Hart LLP, Las Vegas, NV, Dora Lane, Esquire, Attorney, Holland & Hart LLP, Reno, NV, Brad Michael Johnston, Johnston Law Offices, P.C., Yering-ton, NV, for Defendant-Appellee
    Before: GOODWIN, LEAVY, and SILVERMAN, Circuit Judges.
    
      
       The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2).
    
   MEMORANDUM

William Herron appeals the district court’s summary judgment in his action alleging that Peri & Sons Farms, Inc., discriminated against him by terminating his employment as a maintenance mechanic and failing to accommodate his bad back in violation of Americans with Disabilities Act. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291. We review de novo. Samper v. Providence St. Vincent Med. Ctr., 675 F.3d 1233, 1235 n.1 (9th Cir. 2012). We affirm.

The district court properly granted summary judgment because Herron failed to raise a genuine dispute of material fact as to whether he was “ ‘a qualified individual able to perform the essential functions of the job with reasonable accommodation.’ ” Id. at 1237 (citation omitted) (setting out requirements for a prima facie case of failure to accommodate); see also id. (to determine whether an individual is qualified, “ £[t]he court first examines whether the individual satisfies the requisite skill, experience, education, and other job-related requirements oí the position’ ” (citation omitted)); Snead v. Metro. Prop. & Cas. Ins. Co., 237 F.3d 1080, 1087 (9th Cir. 2001) (same requirements for a prima facie case of disability discrimination). The record shows that the maintenance mechanic position for which Herron was hired required a certificate of completion or equivalent from a certified trade school. It is undisputed that Herron lacked a certificate of completion from a certified trade school, and Herron provided no evidence that his various other expired certificates demonstrated equivalent training.

AFFIRMED. 
      
       This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.