N O T FO R PUB L ICAT IO N UNITED STATES C OUR T OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH C IR C UIT DAN GAZZANO, Plaintiff - Appe lla nt,
v. STANFORD UNIVER SITY; SEIU HIGHER EDUC A TION W ORKER S LOC AL 2007, SER

VIC E EM PLOYEES INTER NATIONAL UNION, De fe nda

nts - Appe lle e s. No. 14-15577 D.C . No. 5:12-c v-05742-PSG
M EM O R ANDUM *

Appe a l from

the Unite d

Sta t e s Distric t C ourt for the Northe rn Distric t of C a lifornia Pa ul S. Gre wa l, M a gistra

te Judge , Pre siding Argue d a nd Subm itte d April 14, 2016 Sa n Fra n c isc o , C a lifornia B e fore : W ALLAC E, SC HR OEDER , a nd KOZINSKI, C i rc uit Judge s. Pla intiff-Appe lla

nt Da n Ga z z ano a

ppe a ls from

the distric t c ourt’ s sum

m ary judgm e nt in fa

vor of his form e r e m

ploy e r, Stanford Unive rsity , a nd his Union, Loc a l C ha

pte r 2007 of the Se rvic e Em ploy e e s Inte rnationa l Union Highe r 

# FIL ED MAY12 2016 M OLLY C. DW Y ER, CLERK U
. S
. CO URT O F APPEALS

* This disposition is not a ppropria te for public a t ion a

nd is not pre c e de nt e xc e pt a s provide d

by 9th C ir. R . 36-3.Educ a tion W orke rs. Sta nford te rm inate d Ga z z ano from his job a s a groundske e pe r. The te rm i na tion le tte r e xpla i ne d tha t the te rm i na tion wa s on
a c c ount of a long history

of ina ppropria t e and ha ra ssing c o m

m e nts, inc luding
ra c i st, se xist, a

nd hom ophobic re m arks a bout c olle a gue s. Although the distric t c ourt dism isse d the bre a c h of c ontra c t c la im a ga inst Stan ford on pre e m

ption grounds, suc

h a c la im m a y be m a inta ine d pursua

n t to § 301 of the La

bor M an a ge m e nt R e la tions Ac t, 29 U.S.C . § 185, if the pla intiff is
a ble to show tha

t the union bre a c he d its duty of fa i r re pre se ntation. S o re m e k un v . Thrifty Pay le ss, Inc
. , 509 F.3d 978, 987 (9th C ir. 2007). The Union, howe v e r, inve stiga te d Ga z z ano’ s grie v anc e , c arrie d it through thre e ste ps of the grie va nc e proc e d ure s a nd ne gotia

te d a se ttle m e nt, whic h Ga z z ano de c line d to a c c e pt. R e ly i ng on c ounse l’ s e va luation of the c a se tha t the arbitration would be
unsuc c e s sful, the U n ion de c ide d not to proc e e d to a rbitration. In re sponse to the Union’ s m otion for sum

m ary judge m e nt, Ga z z ano a ba n done d the a lle ga tions of his
c om pla i nt, tha t the Union ha d a c te d out of a nim us, a nd atte m pte d to a rgue a ne w the o ry unsupporte d by

the ple a dings. Ga

z z ano fa i le d to e sta

blish a ny bre a c h of the Union’ s duty

of fa ir re pre se ntation. M ore ove r, the re c o rd be a rs out the le g itim ate , nondisc rim i na tory re a sons Stan ford provide d in its te rm ination le tte r. The re is no e v ide nc e tha t the re a sons 2for te rm ination we re pre t e xtua l or tha t Sta nford tre a te d Ga z z ano m ore ha rshly tha n it tre a te d othe r individua l s in sim ila r c irc um sta

nc e s. Ga z z ano’ s disa

bility disc rim ination c la im

fa ils for the re a sons sta

te d by the distric t c o urt. The distric t c ourt did not a buse its disc re tion in lim

iting disc ove ry

to a pe riod be ginning in 2011, c orre sponding to the tim e Ga z z ano’ s c la im s a

rose . AFFIRM E D
.

3