# U ni te d S ta te s Co ur t of A pp ea ls

For the Eig hth Circu it

__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ _

No. 1 4- 27 85

__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ _

Xua n Hu y nh

ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll l Pla in ti

ff - App el la nt

v.

Uni te d S ta te s Dep art m en t o f Tran sp or ta ti on

ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll l Defe nd

an t - Ap pe ll ee

__ __ __ __ __ __

App eal fro m

Uni te d S ta te s Di st ric t Co ur t

fo r th e Dis tri ct of M in ne so ta - Mi nn eap ol is

__ __ __ __ __ __

Su bm it te d: May 13, 2 01 5

Fil ed : J ul y

24 , 20 15

__ __ __ __ __ __

Befo re RI LEY, Chi ef J ud ge , MURPHY an d M ELLOY, Cir cu it Ju dg es

.

__ __ __ __ __ __

MURP HY, Circ ui t J ud ge

.

Xua n Huynh br ou gh t th i s e mp lo y m en t di sc riminat io n act io n ag ai ns t th e

Dep art m en t of Tran sp or ta ti on ("DOT") un de r Tit le VII, 42 U.S.C. § 20 00 e-2

, an d th e

M i n ne so ta Hum an Ri gh ts Act, Mi nn

. St at

. Ann

. § 36 3A.0 8. Huynh

, a Viet n a mes e

Am eri can

, al le ge s th at th e DOT's Fed eral Avi at io n Adm i n i s t r a ti on ("F AA")

di sc riminat ed ag ai ns t h i m ba se d on race whe n it te rm in at ed hi s em pl oym en t as atra in ee ai r tra ffi c c on tro ll er. The di st ric t co ur t co nc lu de d th at Huynh ha d fai le d to 1

sh ow th at th e FAA's st at ed reas on fo r fir in g hi m was a pr et ex t fo r raci al

di sc riminat io n. It gr an te d su m m ary jud gm en t to th e DOT, an d Huy nh ap pe al s. W e

affi rm

.

I.

Huynh be ga n wor ki ng at th e FAA in 20 09

. Afte r gr ad ua ti ng f r o m th e FAA

Trai ni ng Acad em

y in Okl ah om a, he acce pt ed a po si ti on as a tr a i n e e ai r tra ffi c

co nt ro ll er at th e Mi nn eap ol is Air Rou te Traffi c Co nt ro l Ce nt er (t he "Ce nt er" ). The

Cen te r is on e o f 21 "en rou te " co nt ro l fa ci li ti es whi ch gu id e ai rcra ft flyin g ov er th e

Uni te d St at es

. The Cen te r's ai rs pa ce is di vi de d in to si x area s ba se d on ge og rap hy an d

al t i t u de

. The se si x area s are each su bd iv id ed in to si x se ct or s, an d each se ct or ha s

bo th a rad ar co nt ro ll er an d a da ta co nt ro ll er po si ti on

. Trai ne es li ke Huynh are

req ui r e d t o c ert ify at bo th of th es e po si ti on s in each of th e si x se ct or s wit hi n th ei r

as si gn ed area —a t ot al of t welv e p os it io ns to be cert ifi ed for each tra in ee.

H u yn h ' s tra in in g at th e Cen te r was go ve rn ed by th e FAA's Air Traffi c

Tech ni cal Trai ni ng Ord er (th e "t rai ni ng or de r")

. Und er th e tra in in g or de r, tra in ees are

al lo tt ed a se t nu m

be r of "o n th e job " tra in in g ho ur s a t t h e r a d a r an d da ta co nt ro ll er

po si ti on s wit hi n th e se ct o r s of th ei r as si gn ed area

. Trai ne es m ay rece iv e a li m it ed

nu m be r of ad di ti on al h o u rs if th ei r tra in ers be li ev e th ey can cert ify wit hi n th e

ad di ti on al ti m e, bu t ad di ti on al ho ur s are no t gu aran te ed

. Afte r co m pl e t i o n of th e

al lo tt ed tra in i n g ho ur s fo r an y gi ve n po si ti on

, a tra in ee is req ui red to co m pl et e a

"ce rti fic at io n sk il l ch eck ." A tra in ee is su bs eq ue nt ly ei t h e r c e r ti fie d or su sp en de d

fro m th e tra in in g pr og ram

. A tra in ee can al so be su sp en de d fo r pe rfo rm in g po or ly on

pe rfo rm an ce sk il l ch eck s ad m in is te red m on th ly to en su re th at th e tra in ee is

The Hon or ab le Dav id S. Dot y

, Uni te d St at es Dis tri ct Ju dg e fo r th e Dis tri ct of 1

Mi nn es ot a.

-2

-p r o g r e s si ng ap pr op ria te ly. If a tra in ee is su sp en de d aft er a sk il l ch eck

, a bo a r d

co m po se d of two su pe rv is or s an d a un i o n r e p res en ta ti ve rev ie ws th e tra in ee's

pe rfo rm an ce an d is su es a reco m m en da ti on to th e ai r t r a f f i c man ag er, th e Cen te r's

h i g h e s t au th or it y

, on whe th er ad di ti on al tra in in g is warra nt ed

. If th e ai r tra f f i c

m an ag er ch oo se s no t to pr ov id e ad di ti on al tra in in g, a tra in ee m ay at te m pt to tra ns fer

to a di ffer en t ce nt er o r fac e te rm in at io n.

Up o n hi s arri va l at th e Cen te r, Huynh was as si gn ed to tra in in Area Si x. He

co m pl et ed cl as sr oo m an d la b in st ru ct io n, aft er whi ch he wa s a s si gn ed to a tra in in g

te am to in st ru ct an d ev al ua te hi m as he co m pl et ed on th e job tra i n i n g. A tra in in g

te am is m ad e up of two on th e job tra in in g in st ru ct or s an d a tra in in g su pe rv is or who

ad m in is te rs sk il l ch eck s an d fin al cert ifi cat io n ch eck s at each of th e twel ve ai r tra ffi c

co nt ro ll er po si ti on s wit hi n a tra in ee's as si gn ed area

. Afte r each tra in in g se ss io n, th e

tra in in g te am pr ov id es th e tra in ee wit h a de ta il ed writ te n pe rfo rm an ce ev al ua ti on th at

reco rd s th e tra in ee's pr og res s on se ve n m ajor job ta sk s an d 25 s e p a r a t e s ub ta sk s.

The se writ te n fo rm s no ti fy th e tra in ee of pe rfo rm an ce area s ne ed ing im pr ovem en t an d

he lp tra in in g rev ie w bo ard s an d th e ai r tra ffi c m an ag er a s s e s s a tra in ee's ab il it y to

pe rfo rm th e d ut ie s o f an air tra ffi c co nt ro ll er.

Huynh was in it ia ll y as si gn ed to co m pl et e on th e jo b tra in in g wit h tra in in g

su pe rv is or Ly le Mad se n an d tra in in g in st ru ct or s Nan cy Tore n an d Barb ara O ' Sh ea.

He was al lo tt ed 18 0 ho ur s un de r t h e i r i n s t ru ct io n to cert ify as a da ta co nt ro ll er at

Sect or 27

. Huynh rep or te d pr ob le m s wit h bo th hi s in st r u c t o r s

. Acco rd in g to hi m

,

Tore n to ld hi m he wou ld no t m ak e it th ro ug h trai ni ng if he cro ss ed he r an d accu se d

hi m un fai rly of be in g arg um en ta ti ve du rin g th e i r t r a in in g se ss io ns

. Huynh al so

as se rts th at he di d no t ge t al on g wit h O'Sh ea. Huynh cl ai m s th at he was tre at ed m or e

ha rs hl y th an th e ot he r m em be rs of h i s tra in in g cl as s an d po in ts ou t th at he was th e

on ly A si an Am eri can m em be r of th e gr ou p. Afte r co m pl ai ni ng to hi s tra in in g

su pe rv is or an d req ue st in g a ne w t r a i n in g te am th ro ug h hi s un io n rep res en ta ti ve , h e

-3

-was pr om

pt ly as si gn ed a di ffer en t te am

. The ne w tra in in g te am co ns is te d of tra in in g

su pe rv is or Greg San te r an d tra in in g in st ru ct or s Tod d Mar te ns on an d Bri an Van ce.

Van ce an d Mar te ns on rep or te d t h a t Huynh was pe rfo rm in g po or ly fo r th e

Sect or 27 da ta co nt r o l le r po si ti on

. Huynh was gr an te d 42 ad di ti on al on th e job

tra in in g h ou rs ab ov e th at po si ti on 's 1 80 tar ge t h ou rs so he co ul d im pr ov e. Afte r he

co m pl et ed hi s ad di ti on al tra in in g ho ur s, M a r te ns on reco m m en d th at tra in in g

s u p e r vi so r San te r cert ify Hu y nh at Sect or 27 si nc e he an d Van ce ha d ta ke n ov e r a s

hi s tra in in g te am ne ar th e en d of hi s al lo tt ed ho ur s th ere. Mar te ns on wan te d to gi ve

H u yn h a c ha nc e to st art an ew at an ot he r se ct or

. Su pe rv is or San te r ag reed an d

cert ifi ed Huynh a s a S ect or 27 da ta co nt ro ll er.

Huynh was th en as si gn ed to co m pl et e tra in in g an d cert ify as a da ta co nt ro ll er

at Sect or 38

, th e se co nd of hi s twel ve req ui red cert ifi cat io ns

. He was ag ai n all ot te d

a ta rg et m ax im

um of 1 80 on th e job tra in in g ho ur s. Van ce and Mart en so n re po rte d

th at Huynh pe rfo rm ed po or ly th ro ug ho ut hi s tra in in g. The y no te d th at he co ul d no t

ap pl y hi s th eo ret ic al kn owl ed ge to li ve si tu at io ns or ad ap t to c h a n g i n g ai r tra ffi c

pa tt ern s. Huynh 's tra in in g te am pr ov i d e d hi m wit h nu m ero us op po rtu ni ti es to

im pr ov e hi s sk il ls in tra in in g si m ul at io ns be y on d hi s 18 0 ta rg et ho ur s. Nev ert he le ss

, Huynh 's pe rfo rm an ce di d no t im pr ov e. Mar te ns on rep or te d th at Huynh di d no t ha ve

co m m an d of ba si c ai r tra ffi c co nt ro l te rm in ol og y a n d g e o g r a p hy an d th at he was

de fen si ve whe n tra in ers br ou gh t m is ta ke s to hi s at te nt io n. Trai ni ng su pe rv is or San te r

co nd uc te d sk il l ch eck s to as se ss Huynh 's pr og res s an d co nc lu de d th at hi s sk il ls were

well be lo w what wou ld be ex pe ct ed gi ve n h is am ou nt of t rai ni ng

.

Bec au se of Huynh 's po or pe rfo rm an ce o n t w o di ffer en t sk il l ch eck s, San te r

reco m m en de d h is tra in in g b e su sp en de d. At th at po in t Hu y nh ha d com pl et ed 85 of

hi s ta rg et 18 0 ho ur s as a da ta co nt ro ll er at Sect or 38

. Su sp en si on of a tra in e e pr io r

to co m pl et io n of th e ta rg et tra in in g ho ur s is wit hi n a su pe rv is or 's di sc ret io n, an d th e

Cen te r's ai r tra ffi c m an ag er, K el ly Nels on

, ag reed wit h San te r th at Huynh 's tra in in g

-4

-sh ou ld be su sp en de d an d ev al ua te d by a rev ie w bo ard

. Huynh was th e on ly m em be r

of hi s cl as s su sp en de d fo r po or pe rfo rm an ce on a sk il l ch eck be fo re co m pl et io n of hi s

18 0 ta rg et ho ur s, bu t he was al so th e on ly tra in ee who ha d be en gr an te d an

op po rtu ni ty to st art an ew at a di ffer e n t s e c t or aft er req ue st in g a ne w tra in in g te am

.

W hi le cert ifyin g a t Se ct or 27

, Huynh ha d recei ve d 42 ad di ti on al on th e job tra in in g

ho ur s b ey on d h is tar ge t 1 80 ho ur s.

Im m ed ia te ly fo ll owi ng hi s s us pe ns io n, Hu y nh at te m pt ed to tra ns fer fro m th e

Cen te r to a lo wer lev el ai r tra ffi c co nt ro l faci li ty. The re are two di ffer en t pro ces se s

fo r tra ns fer be twee n faci li t i e s

. Th e fir st is an Em pl oyee Req ue st fo r Rea ss ig nm en t

("ERR "). A t rai ne e m ay req ue st an ERR tr an sf er t o a ny facil it y at an y ti m e fo r an y

reas on

. Tha t pr oc es s is in it ia te d by th e tra in ee se nd in g an ap pl ic at io n to a rece iv in g

faci li ty. If th at faci li ty wan ts to hi re th e tra in ee, it wil l co nt act hi s or ig in al faci li ty to

se cu re a rel eas e. Man ag em en t at th e tra in ee's or i g i n al faci li ty is no t typic al ly

in vo lv ed in th e ERR pr oc es s an d m ay no t rece iv e no ti ce ab ou t a p o t e n ti al tra ns fer

un ti l th e rece iv in g lo cat io n cal ls to req ue st a tr a i n e e 's rel eas e. Trai ne es m ay al so

tra ns fer th ro ug h an Arti cl e 61 pr oc es s whi ch is in it ia te d aft er th e ai r tra ffi c m an ag er

de ci de s to rem ov e a tra in ee fro m a pr og ram

. The ai r tra ffi c m an ag er m ay reco m m en d

a tra in ee fo r an Art i c l e 6 1 tra ns fer at th e m an ag er's di sc ret io n. Huynh ap pl ie d fo r

do zen s of po si ti on s th ro ug h ERR, bu t no ot he r faci li ti es of fere d to hi re hi m

. Dur in g

th e sa m e p eri od he als o c on te st ed hi s s us pe ns io n b efo re t he rev ie w bo ard

.

A th ree m em

be r rev ie w bo ard ex am in ed Huynh 's writ te n tra in in g reco rd s an d

in te rv ie wed Van ce

, M a r te ns on

, San te r, an d Huynh

. The y co nc lu de d th at al th ou gh

Huynh ha d be en gi v e n c o mp r e h en si ve tra in in g, he ha d fai le d to pr og res s. Two

m em be rs of th e pa ne l vo te d to di sc on ti nu e Huynh 's tra in in g, whi le o n e t h o u g ht he

s h o u l d be gi ve n an ot he r ch an ce. Air tra ffi c m an ag er Nels on rev ie wed th e bo a r d ' s

reco m m en da ti on an d de ci de d to co nt in ue Huynh 's tra in in g un de r a ne w pl an

. Huynh

rece iv ed ad di ti on al cl as sr oo m in st ru ct io n, al lo win g hi m an ot he r op po rtu ni ty to le arn

th e ba si c te rm in ol og y an d ge og rap hy th at he ha d pre vi ou sl y fai le d to m as te r. Si nc e

-5

-Huynh 's tra in in g ha d be en su sp e n de d fo r ov er a m on th at th at po in t, he was gi ve n

se ve ral week s to st ud y an d refr es h hi s le arn in g. San te r th erea fte r co nd uc te d a sk il l

ch eck

, de te rm in ed th at Huynh ha d ret ur ne d to hi s pr i o r l ev el of pe rfo rm an ce, an d

res ta rte d hi s on th e job tra in in g as a da ta co nt ro ll er at Sect or 38 un de r in st ru ct or s

Van ce an d M art en so n.

Sh or tl y aft er Huynh ret ur ne d to on th e job tra in in g, he rep or te d pr ob le m s wit h

hi s su pe rv is or s an d cl as sm at es

. Acco rd in g to Huynh

, tra in i ng su pe rv is or San te r

be ga n be li tt li ng an d cri ti ci zi ng hi m

. San te r's writ te n tra in in g rep or ts in di cat e th at he

ha d in fo rm al ly rep rimand ed Huynh fo r si tt in g id le wit h hi s ey es cl os ed du rin g at le as t

on e tra in in g se ss io n an d fo r pl ay in g wit h hi s cel l ph on e whe n he sh ou ld ha ve be en

s t u d y in g th e ba si c ai r tra ffi c co nt ro ll er te rm in ol og y

, ai rcra ft ch arac te ris ti cs

, an d

ge og rap hy th at hi s tra in ers ha d rep eat ed ly to ld hi m he ne ed ed to le arn

. Huynh cl ai m s

th at he was on br eak at th e ti m e of th es e in ci de nt s an d th at th e whi te m em be rs of hi s

tra in in g c la ss ha d n ot be en si m il arl y rep rimand ed

.

Huynh co m

pl ai ne d to Pat ric k Su ll iv an th at San te r h a d be en tre at in g hi m to o

ha rs hl y

. Su ll iv an was th e Cen te r's op erat io ns m an ag er fo r Areas Fi ve an d Si x, an d

he sp ok e wit h San te r a b ou t Huynh 's co nc ern s. Su ll iv an th en ad vi se d Huynh th at

San te r ha d be en tryin g to he lp hi m su ccee d an d ha d co un se le d hi m ap pr op ria te ly, an d

he de cl in ed to as si gn Huynh a ne w tra in in g su pe rv is or

. Huynh po in ts ou t in co nt ras t

th at Su ll iv an ha d as si gn ed a ne w su pe rv is or fo r a w hi te co wor ke r who ha d al so

co m pl ai ne d a bo ut San te r's tra in in g m et ho ds

.

Huynh cl ai m s in ad di ti on th at he to ld Su ll iv an so m e co wor ke rs ha d us ed raci al

sl ur s aro un d hi m

, refe rred to raci al st ereo types

, an d im it at ed an "As ia n acce nt " in hi s

pr es en ce. He al so to ld Su ll iv an th at he ha d fo un d a McDo na ld 's job ap pl ic at io n in hi s

he ad se t bi n at wor k, whi ch he in te rp ret ed to be an in su lt an d a co m m en t on hi s ab il it y

to pe rfo rm hi s job

. Su ll iv an ad dr es se d th at in ci de nt im m ed ia te ly by rep or ti ng it to th e

Cen te r's st aff m an ag er who f o r w a r de d it on to th e FAA's in te rn al acco un ta bi li ty

-6

-bo ard

. Su ll iv an al so he ld a tra in in g se ss io n o n wor kp la ce be ha vi or fo r al l th e

co nt ro ll ers in Area Si x.

The reaf te r Su ll iv an wor ke d wit h Huynh an d a un io n of fic ia l to acco m

m od at e

a tra ns fer to a di ffer en t area wit hi n th e Cen te r. Huynh ha d to ld th e un io n of fic ia l th at

he wan te d a tra ns fer to Area Thre e be cau se "n o on e fai ls tr a i n i n g i n Area Thre e."

Su ll iv an an d th e un io n of fic ia l bo th ag reed

, ho wev er, th at Huynh 's b e s t ch an ce of

su cces s wou ld be a tra ns fer to Area Fi ve

. Tha t a r e a s h ared a bo rd er wit h Area Si x

an d wou ld ha ve al lo wed Huynh to co nt in ue us in g m uc h of th e sp eci fic ro ut e an d area

tra in in g he ha d al read y rece iv ed

. Huynh ne ve rth el es s ch os e t o rem ai n in Area Si x.

Huynh 's pe rfo rm an ce in it ia ll y sh owe d si gn s o f im pr ov em en t aft er he was

rei ns ta te d an d gi ve n a ne w tra in in g pr og ram

, bu t th at im pr ov em en t di d no t co nt in ue

.

Trai ni ng in st ru ct or Van ce no te d th at Huynh st il l fai le d t o l e a rn ba si c ai rcra ft

ch arac te ris ti cs an d arg ue d wi t h hi s in st ru ct or s. San te r co nd uc te d m ul ti pl e

pe rfo rm an ce sk il l ch eck s ov er th e co ur se of Huynh 's ren ewed on th e job tra in in g an d

no te d th at Huynh pe rfo rm ed r o u t i n e ta sk s well

, bu t la ck ed th e ab il it y to ap pl y hi s

tra in in g in un pr ed ic ta bl e or ev ol vi ng si tu at io ns

. San te r no te d m or e th an ei gh t area s

in whi ch Huynh 's pe rfo rm an ce was de fic ie nt

, a n d he as si gn ed ad di ti on al tra in in g

si m ul at or ses si on s t o h el p Hu y nh m ak e th e req ui red im pr ov em en ts

.

Upo n co m

pl et io n o f Huynh 's ta rg et 18 0 tra in in g ho ur s at th e Sect or 38 da ta

co nt ro ll er po si ti on

, San te r ad m in is te red a cert ifi c a ti on ch eck du rin g whi ch Huynh

pe rfo rm ed po or ly in th e sa m e area s th at ha d be en id en ti fie d in hi s earl ie r sk il l ch eck s.

San te r reco m

m en de d s u sp en si on of Huynh 's tra in in g, an d th e ag en cy co nv en ed a

se co nd tra in in g rev ie w bo ard

. Tha t bo ard in te rv ie wed H u yn h

, h is un io n

rep res en ta ti ve

, Mar te ns on

, Van ce, an d San te r an d rev ie wed th e writ te n reco rd s fro m

Huynh 's se co nd ro un d of tra in in g. The rev ie w bo ard co nc lu de d th at Huynh st il l

la ck ed ba si c pr o fic ie nc y in ai r tra ffi c co m m un ic at io ns

, se ct or kn owl ed ge

, an d

fa m ili ar ity w ith ai rc ra ft ch ar ac te ri sti cs

. It un an im ou sl y reco m m en de d di sc ontinua

tio n

-7

-of Huynh 's tra in in g, reas on in g th at ad di ti on al si m ul at io ns an d on th e job in st ru ct io n

wou ld no t ov erco m e h i s d efi ci en ci es

. Air tra ffi c m an ag er Nels on rev ie wed th e

bo ard 's reco m

m en da ti on an d Huynh 's tra in in g reco rd s be fo re de ci di ng to di sc on ti nu e

hi s t rai ni ng

.

Huynh was no ti fie d in Feb ru ary 2 01 1 th at he wou l d be de m ot ed , r eas si gn ed

,

or se pa rat ed fro m th e ag en cy

. Alt ho ug h he ha d ap pl ie d fo r do zen s of t r a n sf ers to

lo wer le ve l fa ci li ti es th ro ug h t he ERR p ro ces s, n o fa ci li ti es ha d m ov ed to hi re hi m

.

Giv en hi s im

pe n d i ng te rm in at io n, Huynh req ue st ed reco m m en da ti on le tt ers to

faci li ta te hi s ERR tra ns fer to a lo wer le ve l faci li ty. Su ll iv an of fere d to writ e hi m a

le tt er fo r a l owe r le ve l po si ti on , bu t n ot for an air tra ffi c co nt ro ll er p os it io n. Sa nt er

de cl in ed to reco m

m en d Huynh al th ou gh he wro te a le tt er of reco m m en da ti on fo r on e

of Huynh 's whi te cl as sm at es who tra ns ferr ed th ro ug h th e ERR pr oc es s. The su m m ary

jud gm en t reco rd in di cat e s t h a t reco m m en da ti on le tt ers are no t req ui red fo r ERR

tra ns fers an d a re n ot ord in ari ly part of t he ERR p ro ces s.

Giv en hi s i na bi li ty t o fi nd a rece iv in g fa ci li ty w il li ng to hi re h im th ro ug h t he

ERR pr oc es s, Huynh req ue st ed th at Nels on pe rm it hi m to be gi n th e Arti cl e 61 tra ns fer

pr oc es s. Tha t pr oc e s s m ay be in it ia te d at an ai r tra ffi c m an ag er's di sc ret io n aft er

su sp en si on of tra in in g. Afte r care fu l rev ie w of Huynh 's tra in in g reco rd

, Nels on st at ed

th at be cau se co un tl es s li ve s de pe nd on th e ab il it y of ai r tra ffi c co nt ro ll ers to pe rfo rm

th ei r du ti es

, he co ul d no t in go od co ns ci en ce su pp or t tra ns ferr in g Huynh to se rv e as

an ai r tra ffi c co nt ro ll er ei th er at th e Cen te r or at a l o w e r le ve l faci li ty. Nels on di d

ho wev er ini ti at e an Arti cl e 61 tra ns fer pro ces s for fiv e of Huynh 's whi te cl as sm at es

aft er t he y fai le d t o c ert ify at th e Cen te r.

Huynh fil ed a ti m el y ch arg e o f di sc riminat io n ag ai ns t th e DOT, an d in

Decem be r 20 12 he br ou gh t th is em pl oym en t di sc riminat io n act io n in fed eral di st ric t

co ur t un de r Tit l e V I I

, 42 U.S.C. § 20 00 e-2

, an d th e Mi nn es ot a Hum an Ri gh ts Act,

Mi nn

. St at

. Ann

. § 36 3A.0 8. He al le ge d th at th e DOT ha d di sc riminat ed ag ai ns t hi m

-8

-ba se d on race whe n it te rm in at ed hi s em pl oym en t as a tra in ee ai r tra ffi c co nt ro ll er an d

refu se d hi s tra ns fer re qu es ts . The d is tri ct co ur t co nc lu de d t ha t Hu y nh ha d fai le d to

sh ow th at th e DOT's st at ed reas on fo r fir in g h i m w a s a pr et ex t fo r raci al

di sc riminat io n, an d it gr an te d su m m ary jud gm en t fo r th e go ve rn m en t. Huynh

ap pe al s.

II.

W e rev ie w de no vo th e di st ric t co ur t's gr an t of su mm a ry jud gm en t to th e

go v ern m en t. Ri do ut v. JB S USA, LLC, 71 6 F.3 d 10 79

, 10 83 (8 th Ci r. 20 13 ).

Su m m ary jud gm en t is ap pr op ria te if th ere is no ge nu in e di sp ut e of m at eri al fact an d

a pa rty is en ti tl ed to jud gm en t as a m at te r of la w. Id

. A pl ai nt iff "m ay es ta bl is h

un la wfu l em

pl oym en t di sc riminat io n th ro ug h di rect or in di rect ev id en ce." Bea rd en

v. In t'l Pap er Co ., 52 9 F .3d 82 8, 8 31 (8t h C ir. 2 00 8)

.

The pa rti es ag ree th at th ere is no di rect ev id en ce of r a c ia l di sc riminat io n in

Huynh 's cas e, an d t hu s "we ap pl y th e fram ewo rk la id ou t in McDo nn el l Dou gl as

Co rp

. v. Green " to de te rm in e w h e th er he ha s "es ta bl is he d a pr im a faci e cas e" of

em pl oym en t di sc riminat io n. Id

. (ci ti ng 41 1 U.S. 79 2 (1 97 3) ). Huynh m us t sh ow th at

(1 ) he was a m em

be r of a pr ot ect ed gr ou p; (2 ) he was qu al ifi ed to pe rfo rm th e job ; (3 )

he su ffer ed an ad ve rs e em pl oym en t act io n; an d (4 ) ci rcu m st an ces pe rm it an in fere nc e

of di sc riminat io n. Id

. A "p rima faci e cas e crea te s a pr es um pt io n of un la wfu l

di sc riminat io n, sh ift in g th e bu rd en of pr oo f to th e em pl oyer to pr es en t ev id en ce of a

le gi ti m at e, no nd is cri m in at or y reas on fo r it s ad ve rs e em pl oym en t act io n." Id

. If "t he

em pl oyer can art ic ul at e a n o n d is cri m in at or y reas on

, th e bu rd en ret ur ns to th e

em pl oyee to pr ov e th at th e pr of fere d reas on is pr et ex tu al ." Id

. at 83 1– 32

. Here, th e

pa rti es di sp ut e whe th er Huynh was su bjec t to m or e th an on e a d ve rs e em pl oym en t

ac t i o n a nd whe th er th e no nd is cri m in at or y reas on th e DOT ga ve fo r fir in g an d

refu si ng to tra ns fer Huynh —h is po or pe rfo rm an ce— wa s a pr et ex t fo r raci al

di sc riminat io n.

-9

-Bo th pa rt ie s ag re e tha t H un y h's te rm in at io n was an ad ve rs e em pl oym en t act io n.

Hun y h arg ue s ho wev er th at San te r's de ci si on to su sp en d hi s tra in in g aft er he ha d on ly

co m pl et ed 85 o f h i s al lo tt ed 18 0 ho ur s fo r on th e job tra in in g as a Sect or 38 da ta

co nt ro ll er am ou nt s to an ad di ti on al ad ve rs e em pl oym en t ac ti on . He ass ert s th at th e

in te rru pt io n in hi s tra in in g m ad e it im po ss ib le fo r hi m to pe r f

o r m as well aft er hi s

su sp en si on an d c om

pl ai ns th at no ne of hi s whit e co wor ke rs was s us pe nd ed pri or to

co m pl et io n of th e al lo tt ed 18 0 ta rg et ho ur s. Hun y h al so cl ai m s th at h i s i n s t r uc to rs

s u b jecte d hi m to fu rth er ad ve rs e em pl oym en t act io ns by de nyin g hi m

reco m m en da ti on le tt ers writ te n fo r hi s whi te cl as sm at es an d by ba rri ng h i m fro m

pa rti ci pa ti ng in as m an y

tra in in g s im

ul at io n e xe rci se s.

Huynh 's arg um en t ov erl oo ks th e fact th at n o t "ev erythi ng th at m ak es an

em pl oyee un ha pp y is an act io na bl e ad ve rs e em pl oym en t act io n." LaCro ix v. Sear s,

Ro eb uc k, & Co

., 24 0 F.3 d 6 8 8

, 6 9 1 (8 th Ci r. 20 01 ). Adv ers e em pl oym en t act io ns

"i nc lu de t e r mi n at io n, de m ot io n, tra ns fers in vo lv in g ch an ge s in pa y or wor ki ng

co nd it io ns

, an d ne ga ti ve ev al ua ti on s us ed as th e ba si s fo r ot he r em pl oym en t act io ns ."

Scu sa v. Nes tl e U.S.A. Co

., 18 1 F.3 d 95 8, 96 9 (8 th Ci r. 19 99 ) (ci ti ng Mo nt an do n v.

Farm la nd In du s., In c., 11 6 F.3 d 35 5, 35 9 (8 th Ci r. 19 97 )). An "em pl oyer's de ni al of

an em pl oyee's req ue st fo r m or e tra in in g" a f te r a le av e of ab se nc e is no t it se lf an

"ad ve rs e em

pl oym en t act io n." Grif

fit h v. Ci ty of Des Mo in es

, 38 7 F.3 d 73 3, 73 7 (8 th

Ci r. 20 04 ). Mo reo ve r, th e un di sp ut ed reco rd sh ows th at Huynh was off ered alm os t

a m on th of ad di ti on al cl as sr oo m an d ot he r tra in in g aft er hi s le av e of ab se nc e. He was

al so gi ve n nu m ero us op po rtu ni ti es to en ga ge in tra in in g si m ul at io ns an d affo rd ed 42

ad di ti on al ho ur s fo r on th e job tra in in g be y on d th e 18 0 ho ur s th at he ha d rece iv ed at

each of Sect or s 27 an d 38

. Fi na ll y

, whi le pr ov id in g "n eg at iv e refe ren ces to po te nt ia l

em pl oyers" can qu al ify as an ad ve rs e em pl oym en t act io n, B ak er v. Jo hn Mo rrel l &

Co

., 38 2 F.3 d 81 6, 82 9 (8 th Ci r. 20 04 ), th e de ni al of a po si ti ve reco m m en da ti on le tt er

to Huynh di d no t ris e t o t h e l e v e l of a "m at eri al em pl oym en t di sa dv an ta ge , s uc h as

a ch an ge in sa la ry

, be ne fit s, o r res po ns ib il it ie s." LaCro ix

, 24 0 F.3 d at 69 1. W e

-1 0-co nc lu de th at th e o n l y ad ve rs e em pl oym en t act io n ta ke n ag ai ns t Huynh was hi s

te rm in at io n fr om

th e tr ai ni ng pro gr am

.

The on ly rem ai ni ng is su e be twee n th e pa rti es is whe th er Huynh es ta bl is he d a

ge nu in e di sp ut e of m at eri al fact ab ou t whe th er th e DOT's reas on s fo r fir in g hi m an d

de nyin g hi m a tra ns fer were pr et ex t fo r raci al di sc riminat io n. See Bea rd en

, 52 9 F.3 d

at 83 1– 32

. Huynh arg ue s th at raci st co m m en ts an d jok es m ad e by hi s co wor ke rs

, th e

ha rs h tre at m en t he rece iv ed fro m hi s su pe rv is or s, th e di sc ov ery of a McDo na ld 's job

ap pl ic at io n i n hi s pe rs on al effe ct s at wor k, an d Su ll iv an 's refu sa l to tra ns fer hi m to

Area 3 al l co m

bi ne d to crea te an in fere nc e th at th e DOT's st at ed reas on fo r fir in g hi m

was a pr ete xt fo r racial di sc riminat io n. W e ha ve pr ev io us ly co nc lu de d th at oc cas io na l

in se ns it iv e co m

m en ts li ke th os e m ad e by Huynh 's co wor ke rs were "s tra y r e m ark s"

rat he r th an "p ers ua si ve ev id en ce of m ot iv e w h e n t h e rem ark s are m ad e by pe rs on s

ot he r th an a de ci si on m ak er." Hit t v. Hars co Co rp

., 35 6 F.3 d 92 0, 92 5 (8 th Ci r. 20 04 ).

Man y of Huynh 's co m

pl ai nt s ab ou t cri ti ci sm by hi s su pe rv is or s an d th ei r de ni al

of hi s tra ns fer r e q u e s t are fam il ia r "i ns ta nc es of a su bo rd in at e em pl oyee be in g

su bjec te d to th e cri ti ci sm an d c o n t r ol of a su pe rv is or ." Han no on v. Fawn Eng 'g

Co rp

., 32 4 F.3 d 10 41

, 10 47 –4 8 (8 th Ci r. 20 03 ). Alt ho ug h su pe rv is or s Tore n an d

San te r fo rcef

ul ly crit ic iz ed Huynh f

or be in g arg um en ta ti ve an d fo r fai li ng to st ud y

,

th ei r co m m en ts "d id no t su gg es t an y refe ren ce to race or na ti on al or ig in " no r di d th ey

su pp or t "an in fere nc e of di sc riminat or y in te nt ." Id

. at 10 47

. Fu rth erm or e, th e

su m m ary jud gm en t r e co rd es ta bl is he s th at ai r tra ffi c m an ag er Nels on

, su pe rv is or

San te r, an d in st ru ct or s Mar te ns on an d Van ce rep eat ed ly ga ve Huynh se co nd ch an ces

an d ad di ti on al in st ru ct io n whe n th ey co ul d ha ve fir ed hi m

. W e co nc lu de th at Huynh

ha s no t sh own th at an y

of t he act io ns or s ta te m en ts m ad e b y hi s su pe rv is or s "crea te

a rea so na bl e in fere nc e of di sc riminat io n," as th ey "d o no t su gg es t di sc riminat or y

an im us wit ho ut res or ti ng to sp ecu la ti on ." Tak el e v. Mayo Cl in ic

, 57 6 F.3 d 83 4, 83 9

(8 th Cir . 20 09 ).

-1 1-Fi na ll y , Hu y nh at t e mp t s t o es ta bl is h pr et ex t "b y sh owi ng th at he was tre at ed

di ffer en tl y th an ot he r em

pl oyees who were si m il arl y si tu at ed in al l rel ev an t res pe ct s."

Aus ti n v . Lon g, 77 9 F.3d 52 2, 5 25 (8t h C ir. 2 01 5) . He ass ert s t ha t h e was de ni ed a

tra ns fer to an ot he r faci li ty aft er he fai l e d to cert ify, whi le se ve n of hi s whi te

cl as sm at es were al lo wed to tra ns fer ev en th ou gh th ey ha d al so f a i l e d to cert ify. At

"t he pr et ex t st ag e, th e te st fo r de te rm in in g whe th er em pl oyees are si m il arl y si tu at ed

to a pl ai nt iff is a rig or ou s on e." Bo ne v. G4S You th Serv s., LLC, 68 6 F.3 d 94 8, 95 6

(8 th Ci r. 20 12 ). Tha t is, th e "i nd iv id ua ls us ed for co m pa ris on m us t h av e d eal t wi th

th e sa m e su pe rv is or

, ha ve be en su bjec t t o th e sa m e st an da rd s, an d en ga ge d in th e

sa m e co nd uc t wi th ou t an y m it ig at in g o r di st in gu is hi ng cir cu m st an ces ." Id

.

Fi ve of th e se ve n pu ta ti ve co m pa rat or s tra ns ferr ed t h r o u g h th e Arti cl e 61

p r o c e ss whi ch m

us t be in it ia te d by ai r tra ffi c m an ag er Nels on

. Huynh as se rts th at

Nels on tre at ed hi m di ff e r e n t l y fro m ot he r si m il arl y si tu at ed whi te tra in ees by

al lo win g th em to pr oc eed th ro ug h th at pr oc es s bu t de nyin g hi m th e sa m e op po rtu ni ty.

The reco rd sh ows ho wev er th at ai r tra ffi c m an ag ers li ke Nels on de te rm in e whe th er

to in it ia te th e Arti cl e 61 pr oc es s ba se d on writ te n tra in in g rep or ts au th or ed by a

tra i n e e ' s im m ed ia te su pe rv is or s, an d al l fiv e of th e Arti cl e 61 tra ns fere es id en ti fie d

b y H u y nh "ar e no t va li d co m pa rat or s be cau se th ey ha d di ffer en t im m ed i a t e

su pe rv is or s." Bon e, 68 6 F .3d at 9 56

.

The two rem ai ni ng pu ta ti ve co m pa rat or s tra ns ferr ed th ro ug h th e ERR pr oc es s,

an d Huynh ad m it s th at hi s su pe rv is or s di d no t co nt ro l whe th er a rece iv i n g faci li ty

wou ld acce pt su ch a tra ns fer. The fact th at "d iff eren t de ci si on m ak ers are in vo lv ed "

in acce pt in g e a c h tra ns fer th ro ug h th e ERR pr oc es s is "s tro ng ev id en ce of

no nc om pa rab il it y ." See Jo ne s v . Fran k, 9 73 F.2d 67 3, 6 76 (8t h C ir. 1 99 2)

. Huynh

ne ve rth el es s arg ue s th at su pe rv is or San te r wro te a reco m m en da ti on le tt er fo r on e of

t h e t w o whi te co m

pa rat or s who th en su cces sf ul ly se cu red an ERR tra ns fer, bu t

refu se d to writ e a si m il ar le tt er fo r hi m

. The su m m ary jud gm en t reco rd in di cat es th at

reco m m en da ti on le tt ers are no t req ui red fo r ERR tra ns fers an d are no t or di na ril y pa rt

-1 2-of th e ERR pr oc es s. Fu rth erm or e, S an te r's de ci si on to writ e a le tt er fo r on e tra in ee

do es no t ch an ge th e fact th at each ERR tra ns fer in vo lv es "d iff eren t de ci si on m ak ers ,"

Jo ne s, 97 3 F.2 d at 67 6, an d Huynh ha s no t id en ti fie d co wor ke rs "wh o were si m il arl y

s it ua te d in al l rel ev an t res pe ct s." See Aus ti n, 77 9 F.3 d at 52 5. Thi s arg um en t b y

Huynh th us fai ls , a nd we co nc lu de th at th e d is tri ct co ur t p ro pe rly gran te d s um m ary

jud gm en t to th e go ve rn m en t be cau se Hu yn h h a s n o t sh own th at th e DOT's st at ed

reas on for fir in g h im

was a pre te xt for raci al di sc riminat io n.

Fo r th es e rea so ns we affi rm th e jud gm en t o f th e d is tri ct co ur t.

__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __

-1 3-