T hi s di s pos i t i on i s notappr opr i a t e f orpubl i c a t i on and i s notpr e c e de nt * e xc e pta s pr ovi de d by 9th C i r . R . 36- 3.

T he pa ne l una ni m ous l yc onc l ude s thi s c a s e i s s ui t abl e f orde c i s i on ** w ith o u t o r a l a r g u m e n t. See F ed. R . A pp . P . 34 (a )( 2). NOT F OR P UB L I CAT I ON UN I TE D STATE S C OU RT OF APPE ALS FOR T HE NI NTH CI RC UI T MY H. NG UY E N, P la in tif

f - A p p e lla n t, v. DE P AR T ME NT OF T HE NA VY , A g en cy; R A Y M A B U S , S ecret ary, D ep artm en to f th e N av y, D efen d an t s - A p p el l ees. N o. 09- 55892 D. C . No . 3 : 0 6 - c v - 0 1 2 2 6 - B E NJ MA ME MOR AN DU M *

A pp ea l fr om the U ni t ed S t at es D i stri ctC ou rt f o rth e S o u th e rn D is tr ic t o f C a lif o rn ia R oge rT . B e ni t e z , D i s tr i c tJ udge , P r e s i di ng S ubm i tt e d J a nua ry12, 2011 ** P a s a d e n a , C a lif

o rn ia B efo re: M cK E O W N , W . F L E T C H E R , an d C L IF T O N , C i rcu i tJu d g es. M y H . N guy e n appe a l s f r om the di s tr i c tc ourt ’ s gr a ntof s um m a ryj udgm e nt t o th e N av y o n h er T i t l e V II d i scri m i n at i o n an d h o st i l e w o rken v i ro n m en tcl ai m s, 

# FI LED JAN 18 2 011 M OLLY C. DW Y ER, CLERK U . S. C O U R T OF APPE ALS2

the pa rt i a l gr a ntof

s um m a ry j udgm e ntt o the N a vyon he rT i t l e V I I r e t a l i a t i on c l a i m s , i t s de ni a l of

he rm ot i on f

orr e c ons i de r a t i on, a nd the or de ruphol di ng the M e r i tS y s t e m s P r ot e c t i on B oa r d’ s ( “ M S P B ” ) de c i s i on t o a f f i rm he rr e m ova l f

r om e m pl oy m e ntw i th the N a vy . W e ha ve j ur i s di c t i on pur s ua ntt o 28 U . S . C . § 1291 a n d w e a f

f irm . W e r e v ie w th e d is tr ic t c o u rt’s g r a n t o f s u m m a ryju d g m e n t d e n o v o . V asqu ez v. Cnt y. of L os A ng eles , 34 9 F . 3d 63 4, 63 9 (9th C i r. 20 03 ). W e c on cl ud e thatthere w as n o g en u in e iss u e o f m ater ial fac t t o b e d eter m in ed at trial o n N g u ye n ’s d is c r im in a tio n c la im s , th e r e ta lia tio n c la im s a t is s u e in th is ap p e a l, a n d h e rh o s tile w o rke n v ir o n m e n t c la im s . Se e C e lo tex C o r p . v . Ca tr e tt , 477 U . S . 317, 322- 23 (198 6). A s t o N gu ye n’ s di sc ri m i nat i on and ret al i at i on cl ai m s, the di stri ctcourt pr ope r l y f

ound tha tN guy e n c a nnotr e l yon i nc i de nt s pr i ort o the J une 10, 2002 Se tt l e me n tA g r e e me n tb e c au s e N g u y e n a g r e e d “ t o r e l e a s e th e N a v yf r o m a l l c l a i ms orde m a nds N guy e n m a y ha ve a r i s i ng outof he re m pl oy m e ntw i th the N a vy o c c u rr in g p r io rto th e e f f e c tiv e d a te o f

th is a g r e e m e n t.” T h is A g r e e m e n t is e nf or c e abl e be c aus e N guy e n’ s a r gum e nt s r e ga r di ng dur e s s a nd br e a c h f a i l . T he di s tr i c tc ourtf

ound tha the ra l l e ga t i ons of dur e s s w e r e c onc l us orya nd u n c o rr o b o r a te d , a n d th a t th e r e w a s n o b r e a c h b e c au s e th e N a v yf u lf ille d its o n ly obl i ga t i on r e qui r e d unde rthe A gr e e m e nt , nam e l y , putt i ng i n ar e a s s i gnm e nt3

re qu es t . A dd i t i on al l y, t o sup po rther di sc ri m i nat i on and ret al i at i on cl ai m s N gu ye n c a nnotr e l y on i nc i de nt s pr i ort o A ugus t24, 2002, orf orty - f i ve da y s be f

or e s he in itia te dc o n ta c t w ith a n E E O c o u n s e lo r . See 29 C . F . R . § 1614. 105( a ) ( 1) . T he Na v y h a s n o twa i v e d th e e x h au s t i o n r e q u i r e m e n tc o n t a i n e d i n th e E E OC re gu l at i on s, and there i s e vi dence thatN gu ye n w as aw ar e of thi s r equi re m ent . In a n a f f i da vi tN guy e n s t a t e d tha ts he f i l e d a n E E O i nf

orm a l c om pl a i nti n M a y1998, bu t“ m ore than forty- fi ve days had p as se d [and f] or thatre as on , [s he] di d n otfi l e a form al com pl ai nt . ” A s to N g u y e n ’s d is c r im in a tio n a n d r e ta lia tio n c la im s b a s e d o n e v e n ts oc c urr i ng af

terthe s e da t e s , N guy e n ha s f a i l e d t o e s t abl i s h apr i m af a c i e c a s e of di s c r i m i na t i on orr e t a l i a t i on. S he e ve n a dm i tt e d tha the rs upe rvi s or s a nd c o lle a g u e s n e v e rm a d e a n y s ta te m e n ts ab o u t h e rp r o te c te d c h a r a c te r is tic s . See McD on nel l

D ou glas C orp. v. G re en , 4 1 1 U .S . 7 9 2 , 8 0 2 - 0 5 ( 1 9 7 3 ) . E ven ass um i ng N gu ye n est abl i shed a pri m a f ac i e c as e, the re cord show s that the N a vy ha d l e gi t i m a t e , nondi s c r i m i na t orya nd nonr e t a l i a t oryr e a s ons f or di sc i pl i ni ng and u l t i m at el y r em ov i ng N gu ye n, i ncl ud i ng her s ub st andard com m un i ca t i on s s ki l l s, l ow perf orm ance rat i ng s and com pl ai nt s f rom her c us t om e r s , poora tt e nda nc e a nd habi tua l t a r di ne s s , m i s us e of the gove rnm e nt t el epho nes and com pu t er s, and h eradm i ss i on thatshe t oo k o ri gi nal copi es of fa xes4

a ddr e s s e d t o he rc ol l e a gue s w i thoutthe i rknow l e dge . N guy e n ha s notr a i s e d a g e n u in e is s u e o f

m a te r ia l f

a c t th a t th e N a v y ’s r e a s o n s w e r e m e r e p r e te x t. See V asqu ez , 3 4 9 F .3 d a t 6 4 0 ( d is c r im in a tio n ) ; see a l so M a n a t t v . Ba n k o f Am. , N. A. , 3 3 9 F .3 d 7 9 2 , 8 0 0 ( 9 th C ir . 2 0 0 3 ) ( r e ta lia tio n ) . T he di s tr i c tc ourtpr ope r l y gr a nt e d s um m a ryj udgm e ntt o the N a vyon N guy e n’ s hos t i l e w ork e nvi r onm e ntc l a i m be c aus e N guy e n ne i the rs how e d tha ts he w as subj ec t ed t o v erbal or ph ys i ca l hara ss m entbecause of prot ec t ed chara ct er i st i cs o ra c tiv itie s , n o ra lle g e d th a t th e c o n d u c t w a s s u f f ic ie n tlys e v e r e o rp e rv a s iv e to a lte rth e c o n d itio n s o f

h e re m p lo y m e n t. See M a n a tt , 339 F . 3d a t798. A s the di stri ctcourtst at ed, N gu ye n’ s “ al l egat i on s[ , ] . . . even i f true, ar e nothi ng m ore th an ro u t i n e m an ag eri al act s” an d fai l t o ri se t o th e l ev el o f sev eri ty, o ffen si v en ess, a n d f r e q u e n c y r e q u ir e du n d e ro u rp r e c e d e n t to c r e a te ah o s tile w o rke n v ir o n m e n t. See V asqu ez , 34 9 F . 3d at64 2-44 (s urveyi ng ca se s) . T h e d is tr ic t c o u rt d id n o t ab u s e its d is c r e tio n in d e n y in g N g u y e n ’s m o tio n to a m e n d u n d e rF e d e r a l R u le o f C iv il P r o c e d u r e 6 0 ( b ) . See M acD on ald v. G race Ch u r c h Se a ttle , 457 F . 3d 1079, 1081 ( 9th C i r . 2006) . N guy e n f a i l e d t o pr e s e nt n e w e v id e n c e , se e Fre deri ck S. W yle P rof’l

C orp. v. T

ex aco, Inc. , 764 F . 2d 604, 6 0 9 ( 9 th C i r . 1 9 8 5 ) , o ra n i n t e rv e n i n g c h a n g e i n c o n tr o l l i n g c a s e l a w, s e e N a v a jo5

N a t i o n v . C o n

f e de r a te d T r i b e s a n d B a n d s o f th e Y a ka ma I ndi an N at i on , 331 F . 3d 10 41 , 10 46 (9th C i r. 20 03 ). F i nal l y, the M S P B ’ s dec i si on up ho l di ng the N avy’ s r em ov al of N gu ye n w as no t“ arbi trary , capri ci ou s, an abuse of di sc re t i on , or otherw i se no ti n acc ordance w i th l aw . ” L aw r e nc e v . D e p’ t of I nte r i or , 525 F . 3d 916, 920 ( 9th C i r . 2008) (q u o ti n g 5 U .S .C . § 7 7 0 3 (c )( 1 )) . N g u ye n ’s v ar io u s c h allen g es to th e M S P B ’s deci si on fa i l . F i rs t , the A dm i ni stra t i ve Judg e ( “ A J” ) f ou nd thatthe three fa ct ors a rtic u la te d in B ol l i ngv. D epartm ent of the A i r Force , 8 M . S . P . B . 658, 659- 60 (198 1), w er e m et . T he A J there fore prop er l y r evi ew ed N gu ye n’ s pri or di sc i pl i nary a c t i ons on the r e c or d, r e f us i ng he re f

f ortt o a dm i tne w e vi de nc e i n i t s e va l ua t i on of

“ the re as on abl enes s of the penal ty a s aw ho l e. ” U . S. P o sta l

Serv. v. G reg o ry , 534 U . S . 1, 10 ( 2001) . S e c ond, the A J ’ s de c i s i on t o e xc l ude s t a t e m e nt s m a de bythe N a vy ’ s r e pr e s e nt a t i ve s dur i ng s e tt l e m e ntne got i a t i ons unde rF e de r a l R ul e of E vi de nc e 408 w a s s i m i l a r l y j us t i f i e d. R ul e 408 pr ohi bi t s the i ntr oduc t i on of e vi de nc e “ w he n of

f e r e d t o pr ove l i abi l i tyf

or. . . ac l a i m tha tw a s di s put e d, ” F e d. R . E vi d. 40 8(a) , and N gu ye n adm i t s thatshe hop ed t o i ntrodu ce the evi dence, at leas t i n p ar t, to p ro v e th e N av y’s liab il ity u n d erT it le V II . F in ally, N g u ye n ’s chal l enge t o the re as on abl enes s of herre m ov al fa i l s bec ause the A J di d n otac t a rb itr a r ilyo rc ap r ic io u s lyin c o n c lu d in g th a t u n d e rth e c r ite r ias e t f o rth in D ouglas6

v . V e te r ans A dm i nis tr at i on , 5 M . S . P . B . 31 3, 33 1-32 (198 1), the re cord prov i ded a m p le s u p p o rt f

o rth e N a v y ’s d e c is io n to r e m o v e h e r . AF F I RME D.