N O T FO R PUB L ICAT IO N UNITED STATES C OUR T OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH C IR C UIT
B R YAN B ELGR OVE, Plaintiff - Appe lla nt, v. NOR TH SLOPE B OR OUGH POW ER , LIGHT, AND PUB LIC W ORKS, De fe nda

nt - Appe lle e . No. 13-36184 D.C . No. 3:12-c v-00178-JW S M EM O R ANDUM *

Appe a l from

the Unite d

Stat e s Distric t C ourt for the Distric t of Ala ska John W . Se dwic k, Distric t Judge , Pre siding Subm itte d Ja

nua ry 20, 2016 ** B e fore : C ANB Y, TASHIM A, a nd NGUYEN, C irc uit Judge s. B ry an B e l grove a

ppe a ls pro se from

the distric t c ourt’ s sum

m ary judgm e nt in his e m ploy m e nt disc rim ination a c tion a lle ging fe de ra l a nd sta te la w c la im s for wrongful te rm inat ion, hostile work e nvironm e nt, a nd bre a c h of the im

plie d

# FIL ED JAN 28 2016 M OLLY C. DW Y ER, CLERK U
. S. CO URT O F APPEALS

* This disposition is not a ppropria te for public at ion a

nd is not pre c e de nt e xc e pt a s provide d

by 9th C ir. R . 36-3. ** The pa

ne l una nim ously c onc lude s this c a se is suita ble for de c ision without ora l a

rgum e nt. Se e Fe d. R . App. P. 34(a)(2).c ove na

nt of good fa ith a

nd fa ir de a ling. W e have jurisdic tion unde r 28 U.S.C . § 1291. W e re vie wde novo, Vasque z v . C ounty of Los Ange le

s , 349 F.3d 634, 639 (9th C ir. 2004), a

n d we a ffirm
. The distric t c ourt prope rly grante d sum

m a ry judgm e nt on B e l grove ’ s wrongful te rm inat ion c la im s unde r Title VII and the Ala ska Hum an R ights Ac t be c a use B e lgrove fa ile d to ra ise a ge nuine disputeof m ate ria l fa c t a s to whe the r he wa s pe rform ing a c c ording to de fe nda nt’ s le gitim ate e xpe c tations, whe the r sim ila rly situa te d individuals we re tre ate d m o re favora b ly , or whe the r de fe nda

nt’ s le gitim ate , nondisc rim inatory re a sons for his term ination we re pre te xtua l. Se e id. at 640 & n.5 (se tting forth e l e m e nts of a prim a fa c ie c a se of disc rim ination unde r Title VII and the burde n shifting fra m e work); se e also Grunbe rg v . Alask a State C omm’n for Human Rights , 276 P.3d 443, 449 (Ala ska 2012) (the burde n shifting fra m e work for fe de ra l e m ploy m e nt disc rim inat ion c la im s a pplie s to c la im s unde r the A la ska

Hum a n R ights Ac t). The distric t c ourt prope rly grante d sum

m a ry judgm e nt on B e l grove ’ s hostile work e nvironm e nt c la i m

unde r TitleVII be c a

use B e lgrove fa ile d to ra ise a ge nuine disputeof m ate ria l fa c t a s to whe the r he wa s subje c te d to suffic ie ntly se ve re or pe rva s ive c onduc t. Se eVasque z , 349 F.3d a

t 642 (se tting forth e le m e nts of a prim a fa c i e c a se of hostilework e nvironm e nt unde r Title VII and e xpla ining tha t c ourts
1 3
- 3 6 1 8 4 2look a

t “ a ll the c irc um sta

nc e s, inc luding thefre que n c y of the disc rim inatory c onduc t; its se ve rity ; whe t he r it is phy sic a lly

thre ate ning or humilia

ting, or a m e re offe nsive utte ranc e ; a

nd whe the r it unre a sona

bly inte rfe re s with a

n e m ploy e e ’ s work pe rform anc e ” in de te rm ining whe the r c onduc t viola te s TitleVII). The distric t c ourt prope rly grante d sum

m a ry judgm e nt on B e l grove ’ s sta te la w c la im for bre a c h of the im

plie d c ove n ant of good fa ith a nd fa ir de a ling be c a use B e lgrove fa ile d to ra ise a ge nuine disputeof m ate ria l fa c t a s to whe the r de fe nda n t a c te d with a

n im prope r m otive whe n the y

te rm inat e d him

or whe the r his te rm ination wa s obje c tive ly unfa ir. Se e Smith v . Anc horage Sc h. Dist. , 240 P.3d 834, 844 (Ala ska

2010) (se tting forth e l e m e nts of a c la im for the bre a c h

of the im plie d c ove na

nt of good fa ith a

nd fa ir de a ling unde r Ala ska la w). W e do not c onside r issue s or a rgum e nts not spe c i fic a lly and distinc t ly

ra ise d and a rgue d in theope ning brie f, or issue s or a rgum e nts ra ise d for the first tim e on a ppe a l . Se e Padge tt v . W

right , 587 F.3d 983, 985 n.2 (9th C ir. 2009) (pe r c uriam ). B e lgrove ’ s m otion re ga

rding ne wly

disc ove re d e vide nc e of ta m pe ring a nd inte rfe re nc e , file d on Oc tobe r 30, 2014, is denie d
. AFFIRM E D.

1 3
- 3 6 1 8 4 3