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 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 HE NR Y E KWE AN I a n dI J E AMAK A E K W E A N I, P l ai n t i ffs - A p p el l an t s, v. A M E R I P R I S E F I N A N C I A L , I N C ., D ef

endant- A pp el l ee . N o. 10- 15536 D . C . N o . 2 : 0 8 -cv -0 1 1 0 1 -F JM 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 orthe D i s tr i c tof

A r i z ona F r e de r i c k J . M a rt one , D i s tr i c tJudge , P r e s i di ng

S ubm i tt e d Jul y12, 2011 ** B e f o r e : S C H R O E D E R , A L A R C Ó N , a n dL E A V Y , C ir c u it Ju d g e s . H en ry E k w ea n i an dIjea m ak a E k w ea n i ap p ea l p ro se fr o m th e d istrict co u rt’s s u m m a ryju d g m e n t in th e ira c tio n a g a in s t M r . E k w e a n i’s f o rm e re m p lo y e r . W e h av e ju risd icti o n u n d er2 8 U .S .C . § 1 2 9 1 . W e r ev iew d e n o v o a d istrict co u rt’s 

# FI LED JU L 25 2011 M OLLY C. DW Y ER, CLERK U . S. C O U R T OF APPE ALS10- 15536 2 g r a n t o f s u m m a ryju d g m e n t. Surr e l l v . Cal. W

ate rSe rv . C o. , 518 F . 3d 1097, 1103 (9th C i r. 20 08 ). W e r evi ew for an abu se of di sc re t i on a di stri ctcourt ’ s deni alof a m ot i on f orr e c ons i de r a t i on. M

a cD o n a ld

v . G r a c e Ch u r c h Se a ttle , 457 F . 3d 1079, 1 0 8 1 ( 9 th Ci r . 2 0 0 6 ) . 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 M r. E k w ea n i’ s re t al i at i on and d i spar at e tre atm entcl ai m s bec ause M r. E kw eani fa i l ed t o rai se a g en u i n e d i sp u t e o f m at eri al factas t o w h eth er h i s co m p l ai n tab o u tA m eri p ri se’ s u se of subj ec t i ve and u nfai r f ac t ors i n em pl oym entdeci si on s c on st i tut ed prot ec t ed a c t i vi ty , a nd a s t o w he the rA m e r i pr i s e ’ s l e gi t i m a t e , nondi s c r i m i na t oryr e a s ons f or its a d v e r s e e m p lo y m e n t a c tio n s w e r e p r e te x tu a l. Se e Su rr e ll , 518 F . 3d a t1105- 06, 1108. T h e d istrict co u rt d idn o t ab u se it s d iscr etio n in d en yin g M r. E k w ea n i’ s m o tio n f o rr e c o n s id e r a tio n o f

th e o r d e rg r a n tin g s u m m a ryju d g m e n t o n h is r e t a l i a t i on a nd di s pa r a t e tr e a tm e ntc l a i m s be c aus e M r . E kw e a ni f a i l e d t o s how g r o u n d s w a rr a n tin g r e c o n s id e r a tio n . See D . A r i z . L . R . 7. 2( g) ( r e c ons i de r a t i on r e q u ir e s “as h o w in g o f

m a n if e s t e rr o ro ras h o w in g o f n e w f a c ts o rle g a l au th o r ity thatcoul d n othave been brou gh tt o i t s a tt ent i on earl i erw i th rea sonabl e di l i gence”) . T h e d istrict co u rt d idn o t ab u se it s d iscr etio n in co n stru in g A m er ip rise ’s m ot i on i n l i m i ne , r e ga r di ng the s t a tut e of l i m i t a t i ons on M r . E kw e a ni ’ s f a i l ur e - t o-10- 15536 3 p r o m o te c la im , a s as u c c e s s iv e m o tio n f o rs u m m a ryju d g m e n t. See H of f m an v. T on nem acher , 5 9 3 F .3 d9 0 8 , 9 1 1 - 1 2 ( 9 th C ir . 2 0 1 0 ) . 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 M r. E k w ea n i’ s f a ilu r e - to - p r o m o te c la im u n d e r4 2 U .S .C . § 1 9 8 1 b e c au s e M r . E k w e a n i f a ile dto r a i s e age nui ne di s put e of m a t e r i a l a s t o w he the rthe pr om ot i on he s ought c ons t i tut e d a n opportuni tyf orane w a nd di s t i nc tr e l a t i ons hi p w i th A m e r i pr i s e a nd, th e r e f o r e , atw o - y e a rs ta tu te o f lim ita tio n s ap p lie da n dh is c la im w a s tim e - b a rr e d . See Ch o l la R ea d

y Mi x, In c. v. C i vish , 382 F . 3d 969, 974 & n. 5 ( 9th C i r . 2004) ( f or § 1 9 8 1 c la im , c o u rts b o rr o w th e m o s t ap p r o p r ia te s ta te lim ita tio n s p e r io d , w h ic h is tw o y e a r s in A r iz o n a , u n le s s th e c la im w a s m a d e p o s s ib le b yaf e d e r a l s ta tu te e n a c te da f

te rD e c e m b e r1 , 1 9 9 0 ) ; R odr i guezv . G e n. Motors C or p. , 27 F . 3d 396, 3 9 9 - 4 0 0 ( 9 th C ir . 1 9 9 4 ) ( b e f o r e th e C iv il R ig h ts A c t o f 1 9 9 1 , af

a ilu r e to p r o m o te c l a i m w a s vi abl e unde r§ 1981 “ onl yi f the ne w pos i t i on e nt a i l e d an opportuni tyf or

‘ a new and d i st i nctre l at i on betw ee n the em pl oyee and the em pl oyer , ’ such as an i nc r e a s e i n pa y , the a ddi t i on of s upe rvi s orydut i e s , orac ha nge i n the c ha i n of r e s pons i bi l i ty ” ( quot i ng P at te rs on v . Mc C le an Cr e di t U ni on , 491 U . S . 164, 185 (198 9)). T he di s tr i c tc ourtdi d notabus e i t s di s c r e t i on i n di s m i s s i ng M r s . E kw e a ni p u r s u a n t to th e p a rtie s ’ s tip u la tio n . See F ed. R . C i v. P . 41 (a ); E i te l v . Mc C ool , 78210- 15536 4 F . 2d 1470, 1471- 73 ( 9th C i r . 1986) ( s e tt i ng f orth s t a nda r d of

r e vi e w a nd a f

f i rm i ng un der Rul e 41(a)) . W e d o n o t c o n s id e rp la in tif f s ’ c o n te n tio n s r a is e df

o rth e f ir s t tim e o n ap p e a l. See Sm i th v. M

a rsh , 19 4 F . 3d 10 45 , 10 52 (9th C i r. 19 99 ). P l ai nt i ff s’ re m ai ni ng cont ent i on s are un pers uasi ve. AF F I RME D.