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 by9th 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 ar 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 RO LA N D H I LLS, P la in tif

f - A p p e llan t, v. SE RVI CE EM PL OY EE S I N T E RN A T I O N A L U N I O N ; e t a l., D efen d an t s - A p p el l ees. N o. 11- 56611 D. C . No . 3 : 0 9 - c v - 0 1 9 1 9 - WQHWVG 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 W i l l i a m Q . H a y e s , D i s tr i c tJudge , P r e s i di ng S ubm i tt e d M a y14, 2013 ** B efo re: L E A V Y , T H O M A S , an dM U R G U IA , C i rcu i tJu d g es. R o lan dH ills ap p e a ls p r o s e f r o m th e d is tr ic t c o u rt’s s u m m a ryju d g m e n t in h is a c tio n a lle g in g f

e d e r a l law v io la tio n s in c o n n e c tio n w ith h is u n io n ’s f a ilu r e to pur s ue agr i e va nc e f

orr a c e di s c r i m i na t i on a nd t o pr ovi de hi m w i th va r i ous uni on 

# FI LED MA Y22 2 013 M OLLY C. DW Y ER, CLERK U . S. C O U R T OF APPE ALS11- 56611 2 d o c u m e n ts . W e h a v e ju r is d ic tio n u n d e r2 8 U .S .C . § 1 2 9 1 . W e r e v ie w d e n o v o . L eongv. P ot ter , 3 4 7 F. 3 d1 1 1 7 , 1 1 2 3 - 2 4 ( 9 th Ci r . 2 0 0 3 ) . W e a f f i rm. T h e d istrict co u rt p ro p er ly g ra n tedsu m m ary ju d g m en t o n H il ls’s di sc ri m i nat i on cl ai m s bec ause H i l l s f ai l ed t o rai se a genui ne di sput e of m at er i al f a c t a s to w h e th e rh e w a s av ic tim o f in te n tio n a l d is c r im in a tio n . See B ec k v . U ni ted Food & C om m e r c i al

W orke rs U ni on, L oc al

99 , 5 0 6 F .3 d8 7 4 , 8 8 2 - 8 5 & n .4 ( 9 th C i r . 2007) ( di s c us s i ng the a na l y t i c a l f r a m e w ork appl i c abl e t o ar a c e di s c r i m i na t i on cl ai m ag ai n sta u n i o n u n d er T i t l e V II, an dex p l ai n i n g th at“ a u n i o n m em b er m u st . . . in tr o du c e e v id e n c e th a t th e m e m b e r‘w a s s in g le do u t an dtr e a te dle s s f a v o r ab ly th a n o th e r s s im ilar lys itu a te do n a c c o u n t o f r a c e ’” ( c ita tio n o m itte d ) ) ; E l-H akem v. BJY Inc. , 415 F . 3d 1068, 1075 ( 9th C i r . 2005) ( “ [ T ] he ‘ l e ga l pr i nc i pl e s gui di ng a c ourti n aT i t l e V I I di s put e appl yw i th e qua l f or c e i n a§ 1981 a c t i on. ’ ” ( c i t a t i on om i tt ed)) . M oreover, H i l l s f ai l ed t o rai se a tri abl e di sput e a s t o w hether there w as a n a g e n c yr e la tio n s h ip b e tw e e n th e lo c a l u n io n a n dth e in te rn a tio n a l u n io n . See L a u g h o n v. In t ’l

A l l i a n ce o

f T h ea tri ca l S ta g e E m

p s. , Mo vi n gP i ctu re T

ech n i ci a n s, A r t is t s & A l l i e d Craf

t s of the U . S. & Can. , 248 F . 3d 931, 935 ( 9th C i r . 2001) ( f a c to r s f o rd e te rm in in g w h e th e ra n a g e n c yr e la tio n s h ip e x is ts ) ; Moor e v . L oc al U n i o n , 5 6 9 o

f In t ’l B h d. o f E lec. W o rkers , 989 F . 2d 1534, 1543 ( 9th C i r . 1993) ( i de nt i f y i ng the l i m i t e d c i r c um s t a nc e s unde rw hi c h a n i nt e rna t i ona l uni on m a ybe11- 56611 3 liab le f o rth e a c tio n s o f

alo c a l u n io n ) . F u rth e rm o r e , th e r e is n o in d iv idu a l liab ility u n d e rT itle V I I . See Mi l lerv. M axw ell ’s Int ’l

Inc. , 99 1 F . 2d 58 3, 58 7 (9th C i r. 19 93 ). T he di stri ctcourtprop er l y grant ed sum m ary j ud gm enton H i l l s’ s N at i on al L ab o rR e la tio n s A c t ( “N L R A ” ) c la im b e c au s e th e N L R A d o e s n o t ap p lyto e m p lo y e e s o f

a n yS ta te o rap o litic a l s u b d iv is io n th e r e o f , a n dH ills is ac o u n ty e m p lo y e e . See I

nt ’ l U ni on of O pe rat i ng E ng’ rs v . C ount yof P lum as , 559 F . 3d 10 41 , 10 44 (9th C i r. 20 09 ) ( se ct i on 15 2(2) of the N L R A prov i des thatthe t erm “e m p lo y e r ” e x c lu d e s a n yS ta te o rp o litic a l s u b d iv is io n th e r e o f ; b e c au s e ac o u n tyis ap o litic a l s u b d iv is io n o f as ta te , it d o e s n o t f

a ll w ith in th e s ta tu te ’s s c o p e ) ; see a l so 29 U . S . C . § 1 52 (3) ( “ T he t erm ‘ em pl oyee ’ . . . shal l no ti ncl ud e . . . any i nd i vi du al em pl oyed . . . by any other pers on w ho i s notan em pl oyeras here i n d ef i ned. ”) . AF F I RME D.