2007 D e c i sion s O p inion s of the U nit e d S t at e s C our t of Appe al s for the Thir d C ir c uit 1-29-2007 

# J ohnson v . K eeble r-S unshine P r e c e de nt i al or N on-P r e c e de nt i al : N on-P r e c e de nt i al D ocke t N o . 06-3219

F o llow thi s and a dd it ion al work s at : http://d i git alc ommon s .l a w . vi ll anova . e du/thir dc ir c uit_2007

Thi s de c i sion i s br ou ght t o you for f r e e and ope n a c c e s s b y the O p inion s of the U nit e d S t at e s C our t of Appe al s for the Thir d C ir c uit at V i ll anova U nive r sity S choo l of L a

w Di git al Reposit ory

. It h as be e n a c c ept e d for inclusion in 2007 D e c i sion s b y an authori z e d a dmini s tr at or of V i ll anova U nive r sity S choo l of L a

w Di git al Reposit ory

. F or mor e inform at ion, p le as e c ont a ct Be n j amin . C arl s on@l a

w . vi ll anova . e du . Re c omme nde d C it at ion " J o hn s on v . Ke eb le r-S un shine " (2007). 2007 D e cisio n s . P ape r 1731. http://d i git alc ommon s .l a

w . vi ll anova . e du/thir dc ir c uit_2007/1731NOT P RE CE DE NT I AL UN I TED STATES CO UR T OF A PP EALS F O R T H E T H IR D C IR C U IT N O . 06- 3219

____________ D A V ID M . J O H N S O N , A ppel l ant

v. K E E B L E R -S U N S H IN E B IS C U IT S , IN C ., a / k / a T HE KE E BL E R C OM P ANY

____________________________________ O n A p p ea l Fro m the U n it ed S tat es D istri ct C o u rt

Forthe D i s tr i ctof N ew J er s ey ( D . C . C i vi l N o. 00- cv- 02055) D i s tr i ctJ udge: H onor abl e J os e L. L i nar es

_______________________________________ Subm i t t ed U nderT hi r d C i r cui tL A R 34. 1( a)

J anuary3, 2007 B efor e: R E N D E L L , C O W E N and V A N A N T W E R PE N , C i r cui tJ udges ( Fi l ed J anuary29, 2007)

_____________ OPI NI ON O F THE COURT

_____________ P E R C UR I AM

T h is is a n a p p e a l f

ro m th e D istric t C o u rt’s g ra n t o f su m m a ryju d g m e n t in f a v o r o f K e e b ler -S u n sh in e B isc u its, In c . (“K e e b ler -S u n sh in e ” ) o n D a v id Jo h n so n ’s c laim thatK eebl er - Sunshi ne tr ans ferr ed hi m t o a di ffe r entpos i t i on i n vi ol at i on of Ti t l e V I I of2

the C i vi l R i ght s A ctof 1964 ( “Ti t l e V I I ”) , 42 U . S. C . § 2000e ets eq. J ohns on i s an A fri can-A m eri can m al e. John son assert ed thatK eebler -Sun shi ne d i scr i m i nated against hi m on the bas i s of hi s col or , r ace and s ex. W e w i l l aff i r m , al bei tfordi ffe r entr eas ons than hel d bythe D i s tr i ctC our t . See G uthr i e v. L adyJ ane Col l i er i es , I nc. , 722 F. 2d 1141, 1 1 4 5 n . 1 (3d C ir . 1 9 8 3 )(st ati n g an ap p ell ate c o u rtca n af firm an o rde r of

the D istri ct C o u rt b a s e d u p o n d if

f e re n t r e a s o n s if

th e re c o rd s u p p o rt s th e ju d g m e n t) .

I. K eebl er - Sunshi ne oper at ed a pl antw hi ch pr oduced c ooki es , bi s cui t s and cra ck ers in S ay rev il le, N ew Jerse y . Jo h n so n start ed h is em p loym en t w ith K ee b lerSunshi ne i n 1989 i n t he baki ng and mi xi ng depart m ent . V i r gi ni a R amer , a C auca s i an w o m a n , b e g a n h e r e m p lo ym e n t w ith K e e b ler -S u n sh in e in 1 9 8 1 . F ro m a p p ro x im a tely 1987 t o 1992, R amerhel d t he pes t i ci de contr ol pos i t i on. I n 1992, R amerbegan a d if f e re n t p o s itio n a n d K e e b le r- S u n s h in e o f f e re d th e p e s tic id e c o n tr o l p o s itio n to J o h n s o n . J ohns on acc ept ed and be gan tr ai ni ng w i th R amer . J ohns on hel d the pes t i ci de contr ol p o s itio n u n til 1 9 9 7 . In D e c e m b e r 1 9 9 6 , th e p la n t te m p o ra ri ly cl o s e d f o r m a in te n a n c e . Du r i n g th i s t i me , ma n ye mp l o y e e s ( i n c l u d i n g J o h n s o n ) we r e p l a c e d o n l a y o f f s t a tu s . On oraboutJ anuary6, 1997, K eebl er - Sunshi ne r eopene d the pl ant . A ft erthe pl antw as r eopene d, appr oxi m at el y160 empl oy ees w er e notr et ai ned. A ddi t i onal l y , J ohns on w as one of a bouts even e m pl oy ees “bumped” fr om hi s pos i t i on byco- w or ker s w ho had g re a te r p la n t s e n io ri ty. R a m e r r e p la c e d J o h n s o n in th e p e s tic id e c o n tr o l p o s itio n .3

K eebl er - Sunshi ne tr ans ferr ed J ohns on t o a “s ani t or/ m achi ne cl eane r ” pos i t i on. J ohns on w o rk e d in v a rio u s p o sitio n s w ith in th e p lan t u n til th e p lan t w a s c lo se d d o w n p e rm a n e n tly in 1 9 9 9 . In A p ri l 2 0 0 0 , J o h n s o n f ile d h is c o m p la in t in th e D is tr ic t C o u rt . Speci fi cal l y , J ohns on as s ert ed thathi s tr ans ferfr om the pes t i ci de contr ol pos i t i on t o t he “sani t or/m achine cl eaner” po si t i on w as based o n h i s r ace, colorand sex. A ft er the close o f d i s c o v e ry, K e e b l e r - S u n s h i n e s u c c e s s f u l l y m o v e d f

o rs u m m a ry j u d g m e n t . S p e c i f i c a l l y, the D i s tr i ctC our tdet erm i ned thatJ ohns on fai l ed t o s how a pr i m a fa ci e ca s e bec aus e he d id n o t e s ta b lis h a n in f

e re n c e o f d is c ri m in a tio n . J o h n s o n tim e ly f ile d a n o tic e o f

a p p e a l. II. W e r evi ew the gr antof s um m aryj udgm entde novo. See M cG r eeve yv. St oup, 413 F. 3d 359, 363 ( 3d C i r . 2005) . Sum m aryj udgm enti s pr operw hen, vi ew i ng t he evi dence i n t he l i ghtm os tfavor abl e t o the non- m ovant , ther e i s no genui ne i s s ue of m at er i al fac tand the movi ng partyi s ent i t l ed t o j udgm entas a mat t erof l aw . See Sal dana v . K M a rt C o rp ., 2 6 0 F .3 d 2 2 8 , 2 3 2 (3 d C ir . 2 0 0 1 ); F e d . R . C iv . P . 5 6 (c ). III . C l ai m s of di s cr i m i nat i on underT i t l e V I I ar e ana l y zed unde rthe bur dens hi ft i ng fr amew or k announce d i n M cD onnel l D ougl as C orp. v. G r een, 411 U . S. 792, 802- 04 (1973 ). In order t o sho w a pri m a facie cas e of raci al dis cri m i nati on , a plai nti ff m ust i l l us tr at e that : ( 1) he i s a mem berof a pr ot ect ed cl as s ; ( 2) he w as qual i fi ed forthe4

pos i t i on he hel d; ( 3) he s uffe r ed an a dver s e empl oym entact i on; and ( 4) the ci r cumst ance s of the adve r s e empl oym entact i on gi ve r i s e t o an i nfer ence of di s cr i m i nat i on. See J ones v. S ch. D i st . of P hil a. , 19 8 F . 3d 40 3, 41 0-11 (3d C i r. 19 99 ). If a pl ai nti ff est abli shes a p ri m a f ac ie ca se, th e e m p loy er m u st co m e f o rw ard w ith a leg it im ate, no n -discrim inato ry re a s o n f o r t h e a d v e rs e e m p lo ym e n t d e c is io n . S e e G o o s b yv . J o h n s o n & J o h n s o n M e d ., I nc. , 228 F. 3d 313, 318- 19 ( 3d C i r . 2000) ( ci t i ng T x. D ep’ tof C m ty . A ffa i r s v. B ur di ne, 450 U . S. 248, 254- 56 ( 1981) ) . I f the def endantm eet s thi s bur den, the pl ai nt i ff mustt hen pr ove bya pr eponder ance of the evi dence thatthe l egi t i m at e r eas ons offe r ed bythe defe ndantar e mer el ya pr et extfordi s cr i m i nat i on. See J ones , 198 F. 3d at410 ( ci t i ng B ur di ne, 450 U . S. at252- 53) . I n or dert o s how pr et ext , a pl ai nt i ff musts ubm i tevi dence w h ich : (1 ) c a sts d o u b t o n th e leg iti m a te r e a so n p ro f f e re d b yth e e m p lo y e r su c h th a t a fac t fi ndercoul d r eas onabl yconcl ude thatthe r eas on w as a fa br i cat i on; or( 2) al l ow the fac t fi ndert o i nferthatdi s cr i m i nat i on w as m or e l i kel ythan nota mot i vat i ng or det erm i nat i ve ca us e of the empl oy ee’ s t erm i nat i on. See Fuent es v. Per s ki e, 32 F. 3d 759, 76 2 (3d C i r. 19 94 ). “T he n on -m ov i ng plai nti ff m ustdem on strat e such w eakn esses , im p laus ibil it ies, inco n sist en cies, i n co h ere n cies, or co n tr ad ict ion s in the em p loy er’s pr offe r ed r eas ons fori t s act i on thata r eas onabl e fa ct fi ndercoul d r at i onal l yfi nd them unw or thyof cr edenc e, and henc e i nferthatthe empl oy erdi d notactfor[the as s ert ed] n o n -d is c ri m in a to ry re a s o n s .” Id . (i n te rn a l q u o ta tio n m a rk s a n d c ita tio n s o m itte d ).

W e agr ee w i th t he D i s tr i ctC our tthatJ ohns on s at i s fi ed the fi r s tthr eeK eebler -Sun shi ne co ntes t ed w hetherJohn son’s transfercon st i tuted an ad verse 1 em p loym en t acti o n in the D istri ct C o u rt . H o w ev er, i n it s ap p ell ate b ri ef , K ee b lerSunshi ne does notcont es tthe D i s tr i ctC our t ’ s fi ndi ng thatthe tr ans fercons t i tut ed an ad v erse em p loym en t acti o n . T h ere fo re, th is argu m en t i s d ee m ed w aive d . S ee In re Sur r i ck, 338 F. 3d 224, 237 ( 3d C i r . 2003) ( s t at i ng thatfai l ur e t o i dent i fyorar gue an i s s ue in a n o p e n in g b ri e f

c o n s titu te s w a iv e r o f

th e a rg u m e n t o n a p p e a l) . 5 el ement s of es t abl i s hi ng a pr i m a fa ci e ca s e. H ow ever , w e di s agr ee w i th the D i s tr i ct 1 C our t ’ s concl us i on thatJ ohns on fai l ed t o s how an i nfer ence of di s cr i m i nat i on. T he p arti es a g ree that Jo h n so n w as re p lace d b yR am er, a C au ca sian w o m an . W h il e this C o u rt no l ongerr equi r es a pl ai nt i ff t o s how thathe w as r epl ace d bys om eone out s i de of the pr ot ect ed cl as s t o es t abl i s h an i nfer ence of di s cr i m i nat i on, s ee Pi vi r ot t o v. I nnovat i ve Sy s . , I nc. , 191 F. 3d 344, 347 ( 3d C i r . 1999) , w e fi nd thatthi s evi dence es t abl i s hes the four th and fi nal el ementof a pr i m a fa ci e ca s e i n thi s cas e. See W r i ghtv. M urr ayG uar d, In c ., 4 5 5 F .3 d 7 0 2 , 7 0 7 (6 th C ir. 2 0 0 6 )(s tatin g th a t a p lain tiff e sta b lish e s th e f

o u rth el ementof a pr i m a fa ci e ca s e i f he w as r epl ace d bys om eone out s i de the pr ot ect ed cl as s or w as tr eat ed di ffe r ent l ythan s i m i l ar l y - s i tuat ed, non- pr ot ect ed empl oy ees ) ; M aynar d v. B d. o f R eg en ts of

D iv. of U n ivs. of

F l. D ep ’to f E d u c., 3 4 2 F . 3 d 1 2 8 1 , 1 2 8 9 (11 th C ir . 2 0 0 3 )(sam e); Z im m erm an n v . A sso cs. F ir st C ap it al C o rp., 2 5 1 F . 3 d 3 7 6 , 3 8 1 (2d C ir . 2001) ( s t at i ng that“the mer e fa ctthata pl ai nt i ff w as r epl ace d bys om eone out s i de the p ro tec ted c las s w ill su f

f ice f o r th e re q u ire d in f

e re n c e o f d isc rim in a tio n a t th e p rim a f a c ie s t age of the Ti t l e V I I anal y s i s ”) . T her efor e, J ohns on es t abl i s hed a pr i m a fa ci e ca s e. N ex t, K ee b ler-Su n sh ine c am e f o rw ard w ith a leg it im ate n o n -discrim inato ry6

r eas on fortr ans ferr i ng J ohns on fr om the pes t i ci de contr ol pos i t i on. See e. g. , W oods on v. Scot tPaperC o. , 109 F. 3d 913, 920 n. 2 ( 3d C i r . 1997) ( not i ng thatthe def endant ’ s bur den atthis st age is rel at i velyl i gh tand that i ti s sat i sfi ed if the d efen dan tart i culat es a l egi t i m at e r eas on forthe adve r s e empl oym entact i on) . K eebl er - Sunshi ne s t at ed that J ohns on w as “bumped” fr om the pes t i ci de contr ol pos i t i on byR amerbeca us e s he had m or e pl ants eni or i tyand coul d per form the j ob. I ndeed, the C ol l ect i ve B ar gai ni ng A gr eementbetw een J ohns on’ s uni on and K eebl er - Sunshi ne pr ovi des thati n the eve ntof a l ay off, an empl oy ee may“bump” anotherempl oy ee outof a pos i t i on as l ong as s he has gr eat ers eni or i tyand has the abi l i tyt o per form the w or k.

B eca us e K eebl er - Sunshi ne ca m e forw ar d w i th a l egi t i m at e nond is c ri m in a to ry re a s o n f

o r t h e tr a n s f

e r, J o h n s o n m u s t s h o w th a t th is re a s o n w a s p re te x tu a l. J ohns on fai l s t o es t abl i s h a mat er i al i s s ue of f actthatK eebl er - Sunshi ne’ s l egi t i m at e nondi s cr i m i nat oryr eas on forthe tr ans ferw as pr et extual . Speci fi cal l y , R amerhad more pl ant se n io rityth a n Jo h n so n . A d d iti o n a lly , K e e b ler -S u n sh in e p re v io u slye m p lo y e d R a m e r in th e p e s tic id e c o n tr o l p o s itio n a n d s h e h a d th e a b ility to p e rf o rm th e w o rk o f

th e p o s itio n . I V. W e h a v e c o n sid e re d a ll th e a rg u m e n ts a n d f in d th a t Jo h n so n f

a iled to c re a te a mat er i al i s s ue of f

actr egar di ng w hetherK eebl er - Sunshi ne’ s l egi t i m at e nondi s cr i m i nat oryr eas on forthe tr ans ferw as pr et extual . A ccor di ngl y , w e w i l l aff i r m the gr antof s um m aryj udgm enti n favorof K eebl er - Sunshi ne.