Case ID: f-appx_418/html/0605-02.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

Raymond OBIAJULU, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. RITE AID CORPORATION; et al., Defendants-Appellees.
    No. 09-17636.
    United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.
    
      Submitted Feb. 15, 2011.
    
    Filed March 4, 2011.
    Raymond Obiajulu, Las Vegas, NV, pro se.
    Thomas K. Hockel, Jonathan A. Klein, Esquire, Kelly, Hockel & Klein P.C., San Francisco, CA, Alan William Westbrook, Perry, Spann & Westbrook, Las Vegas, NV, for Defendants-Appellees.
    Before: CANBY, FERNANDEZ, and M. SMITH, Circuit Judges.
    
      
       The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R.App. P. 34(a)(2).
    
   MEMORANDUM

Raymond Obiajulu appeals pro se from the district court’s summary judgment in his employment action alleging retaliation in violation of Title VII. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291. We review de novo, Vasquez v. Cnty. of L.A., 849 F.3d 634, 639 (9th Cir.2004), and we affirm.

The district court properly granted summary judgment because Obiajulu failed to raise a genuine issue of material fact as to whether some of Rite Aid Corporation’s alleged retaliatory actions constituted adverse employment actions, and, as to the adverse employment actions, whether Rite Aid’s proffered legitimate, non-retaliatory reasons were pretextual. See id. at 646.

Obiajulu’s remaining contentions, including those concerning judicial bias and discovery, are unpersuasive.

AFFIRMED. 
      
       This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.