Case Name: Nalliah RAJAH, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. COUNTY OF CLARK, Defendant-Appellee
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2009-12-15
Citations: 356 F. App'x 996
Docket Number: No. 08-17480
Parties: Nalliah RAJAH, Plaintiff—Appellant, v. COUNTY OF CLARK, Defendant-Appellee.
Judges: Before: O’SCANNLAIN, RAWLINSON and BEA, Circuit Judges.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 356
Pages: 996–997

Head Matter:
Nalliah RAJAH, Plaintiff—Appellant, v. COUNTY OF CLARK, Defendant-Appellee.
No. 08-17480.
United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.
Submitted Dec. 11, 2009.
Filed Dec. 15, 2009.
Kirk Kennedy, Las Vegas, NV, for Plaintiff-Appellant.
Gloria Sturman, Las Vegas, NV, for Defendant-Appellee.
Before: O’SCANNLAIN, RAWLINSON and BEA, Circuit Judges.
The panel unanimously finds this case suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R.App. P. 34(a)(2).

Opinion:
MEMORANDUM
Nalliah Rajah (Rajah) appeals the district court's grant of attorney's fees to County of Clark (Clark County).
Reviewing the attorney's fees award for abuse of discretion, see McCown v. City of Fontana, 565 F.3d 1097, 1101 (9th Cir.2009), as amended, we conclude that the district court applied the correct legal standard and the factual findings support its conclusion that Rajah's claims were without foundation.
In an earlier decision, this court affirmed the district court's grant of summary judgment in favor of Clark County on Rajah's claims of race and age-based discrimination, retaliation, violation of 42 U.S.C. § 1983, and various state law claims. See Rajah v. County of Clark, 313 Fed.Appx. 8 (9th Cir.2008) (unpublished memorandum disposition). Subsequently the district court, citing the proper legal standard and reviewing the magistrate judge's report and the parties' filings, awarded attorney's fees to the County. See Order, Rajah v. County of Clark, No. 2:04-cv-01153-BES-RJJ (D.Nev. Oct. 1, 2008). No abuse of discretion occurred. See Tutor-Saliba Corp. v. City of Hailey, 452 F.3d 1055, 1060 (9th Cir.2006) (concluding that the district court did not abuse its discretion where it "was aware of the proper legal standard" and carefully evaluated each claim to determine "whether there was any colorable legal or factual basis for each claim").
AFFIRMED.
This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.