FI L ED U.S. COURT OF APPEAL S EL EVENTHCI RCUI T SEPT 29, 2010 J OHN L EY CL ERK [DO NOT PUBLISH] IN THE U

NITED STATE S COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE ELE VENTH CIRCUIT

__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ No. 0 9- 15 47 8 Non -Arg um en t Ca le nd ar

__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ D.C. Dock etNo. 0 7- 01 69 1- CV-2 -CLS KIMBER LY L. SMI TH, ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll l Pla in ti ff-Ap pe ll an t, vers us BOOKS-A-M ILLION, ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll l Defen dant -Ap pe ll ee.

__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ App eal fro m

th e Uni te d S ta te s Di st ric t Co urt forth e North ern Dis tri ctof Al ab am a

__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ (Sep te m be r 29 , 20 10 ) Befo re TJ OFLAT, W ILSON an d P RYOR, Ci rcu itJu dg es . PER CURI AM: Kim be rly Sm it h app eal s the su m m ary jud gm en t i n fa vo r of he r fo rm er em pl oyer, Boo ks -A-Mi ll io n, an d a ga in stSm it h’s co m pl ai nt s o f di sc riminat io n i nvi ol at io n o f he r rac e an d g en de r an d o f ret al ia ti on un de r Tit le VII of th e Ci vi l Ri gh ts Act o f 19 64 , 42 U.S.C. §§ 20 00 e-2 (a)( 1) , -3( a), an d v io la ti on s o f st at e la w. W e aff irm. Sm it h a rg ue s t ha t the di st ric t co urt fa il edto co ns tru e fac ts in th e li gh t m os t fav or ab le to he r be cau se itad op te d t he fact s an d l eg al an al y si s s ub m it te d b y Bo ok s- A-Mi ll io n, b utwe di sa gr ee. The reco rdest ab li sh es th atth e d is tri ctco urt co nduc te d acare fu l an d i nd ep en de ntrev ie w of t he fact s an d l aw. Thatth e d is tri ct co urt ad op te d v erb at im

so m e u nd is pu te d fa ct s s ta te d b y Bo ok s- A-Mi ll io n d oe s n ot ren de r th os e fi nd in gs cle arl y erro ne ou s. See James v. St oc kh am Valv es & Fi tt in gs Co ., 55 9 F .2d31 0, 3 14 n.1 (11 th Cir . 19 77 ). Sm it h n ot ab ly doe s n otarg ue th at an y of t he fin di ng s b y

th e d is tri ctco urt ar e in co rrec t, an d S m it h d oe s n otarg ue th atth e d is tri ctco urt erredin it s ap pl ic at io n o f th e la w. Sm it h a ls o arg ue s t ha t the di st ric t co urt s ho ul d h av e co ns id eredev id en ce ab ou t the de ni al of abo nu s i n re so lv in g S m it h’s cl ai m s o f se x- ba se d di sc riminat io n a ndret al ia ti on , bu t thi s ar gu m en t fa il s fo r se ve ral reas on s. Sm it h co m pl ai ne d t ha t s he was d en ie d t he bo nu s b ecau se of r ace- ba se d d is cri m in at io n, bu t Sm it h d idno t al le ge th atsh e was de ni edth e b on us be cau se of h er s ex . Smit h te st ifi edth athe r cl ai m

of g en de r-b as eddi sc riminat io n was ba se d s ol el y on th e fac t sh e was pa idles s t ha n m al e em pl oyees. Sm it h l ik ewis e d idno t m en ti on th e b on us

2in he r co m

pl ai ntab ou t re ta li at io n. Al th ou gh Sm it h l at er as se rte d t ha t Bo ok s- AMi ll io n wi th he ldth e b on us in ret al ia ti on forSm ith’s ac cu sa ti on s t ha t s he was ha ras se d a nddi sc riminat edag ai ns t b ecau se of h er ra ce, Sm it h n ev er am en de d h er co m pl ai ntto in cl ud e th atth eo ry . See Dav is v. Co ca-C ol a Bo tt li ng Co . Con so l., 51 6 F .3d95 5, 9 74 –7 5 (1 1t h C ir. 2 00 8) (affi rm in g t he refu sa l o f th e d is tri ctco urt to co ns id er ei gh te encla im s n otall eg edin th e co m pl ai ntbu t ar gu edon ly in op po si ti on to th e m ot io n fo r su m m ary jud gm en t). Inan y

ev en t, Sm it h d idno t es tabl is h apri m a fac ie cas e o f ret al ia ti on be cau se Sm it h fa il edto est ab li shth atsh e en ga ge d i n s ta tu to ril y

pro te ct edex pr es si on when , on on e o ccas io n, s he ask eda supe rv is orif s he was b ei ng di sc riminat edag ai ns t b as edon he r rac e. See Week s v . Hard enMfg . Cor

p. , 29 1 F .3d13 07 , 13 11 (11 th Cir . 20 02 ) (“ To es tabl is h t ha t a pl ai nt iff en ga ge d i n s ta tu to ril y

pro te ct edex pr es si on , . . . a pl ai nt iff m us t s ho w th at sh e h ada go odfai th , reas on ab le be li ef tha t the em pl oyer was e ng ag edin un la wfu l em pl oym en t p ract ic es .”). The r eco rdals o e st ab li sh es th atSm it h re si gn edhe r em pl oym en t t o t ak e a h ig he r pa y in g jo b wi th an ot he r em pl oyer an d S m it h’s res ig na ti on oc curredto o e arl y forhe r to be co m e el ig ib le fora bo nu s. W e AFFIRM th e su m

m ary jud gm en t i n fa vo r of Bo ok s- A-Mi ll io n.

3