Case Name: Om Parkash KALRA, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Norman MINETA, Secretary of Transportation, Defendant-Appellee
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2003-06-17
Citations: 68 F. App'x 65
Docket Number: No. 02-16902; D.C. No. CV-00-02243-MMC
Parties: Om Parkash KALRA, Plaintiff—Appellant, v. Norman MINETA, Secretary of Transportation, Defendant—Appellee.
Judges: 
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 68
Pages: 65–65

Head Matter:
Om Parkash KALRA, Plaintiff—Appellant, v. Norman MINETA, Secretary of Transportation, Defendant—Appellee.
No. 02-16902.
D.C. No. CV-00-02243-MMC.
United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.
Submitted June 9, 2003.
Decided June 17, 2003.
Before RYMER, THOMAS and SILVERMAN, Circuit Judges.
The panel unanimously finds this case suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R.App. P. 34(a)(2).

Opinion:
MEMORANDUM
Om Parkash Kalra appeals pro se the district court's summary judgment dismissing as time-barred his action alleging that the Federal Aviation Administration discriminated against in violation of Title VTI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and the Age Discrimination in Employment Act of 1964. We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1291. We review de novo, Reese v. Jefferson Sch. Dist. No. 14J, 208 F.3d 736, 738 (9th Cir.2000), and we affirm.
The district court properly dismissed Kalra's claim challenging the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission's ("EEOC") finding that he was not entitled to an SF-50 personnel action form reflecting his retroactive hire. The record shows that Kalra's claim is time-barred because he did not file his complaint within 90 days after receipt of the EEOC's May 31, 1996 decision denying his request. See 42 U.S.C. § 2000e-16(c); Greenlaw v. Garrett, 59 F.3d 994, 997 n. 7 (9th Cir.1995).
Although Kalra timely appealed the EEOC's March 2000 decision denying his Petition For Enforcement, the district court properly granted summary judgment to the defendants because Kalra did not identify any issues for review. See Celotex Corp. v. Catrett, 477 U.S. 317, 323, 106 S.Ct. 2548, 91 L.Ed.2d 265 (1986) (holding that summary judgment is proper unless non-moving party can demonstrate a genuine issue of material fact for trier).
Kalra's remaining contentions lack merit.
AFFIRMED.
This disposition is not appropriate for publication and may not be cited to or by the courts of this circuit except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.