Opinion ID: 745863
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 3

Heading: mcdonnell douglas ' shifting burdens of proof

Text: 13 We apply the burden-shifting method established by the Supreme Court in McDonnell Douglas Corp. v. Green, 411 U.S. 792 (1973), to evaluate claims of age discrimination in employment by plaintiffs who do not have direct evidence of. their employer's discriminatory intentions. See Rose v. Wells Fargo & Co., 902 F.2d 1417, 1420 (9th Cir.1990). 14 The application of the McDonnell Douglas method to age discrimination cases requires a plaintiff to first establish a prima facie case. The elements of a prima facie case are that the plaintiff: 15 (1) was a member of the protected class (age 40 to 70); 16 (2) was performing his job in a satisfactory manner; (3) was discharged; and (4) was replaced by a younger employee. 17 Messick v. Horizon Indus., Inc., 62 F.3d 1227, 1229 (9th Cir.1995). The burden of establishing a prima facie case is not designed to be onerous. Burdine, 450 U.S. at 253. It only requires the production of evidence which suggests that the employment decision was based on age. Diaz v. American Tel. & Tel., 752 F.2d 1356, 1361 (9th Cir.1985). Upon establishing a prima facie case, a presumption of unlawful discrimination arises. Burdine, 450 U.S. at 254. 18 After the plaintiff has established a prima facie case, the burden of production then shifts to the employer to articulate a legitimate, nondiscriminatory reason for the plaintiff's termination. See Wallis v. J.R. Simplot Co., 26 F.3d 885, 889 (9th Cir.1994). Once the defendant has satisfied its burden, the presumption of unlawful discrimination vanishes. See St. Mary's Honor Ctr. v. Hicks, 509 U.S. 502, 511 (1993). 19 At this point, in order to survive summary judgment, the plaintiff must produce enough evidence to allow a reasonable fact finder to conclude either: (a) that the alleged reason for [his] discharge was false, or (b) that the true reason for his discharge was a discriminatory one. Nidds, 113 F.3d at 918. As explained in Nidds, to survive a summary judgment motion, a plaintiff need not provide direct evidence of discriminatory intent as long as a reasonable fact finder could conclude--based on the plaintiff's prima facie case and the fact finder's disbelief of the defendant's reasons for discharge--that discrimination was the real reason for the discharge. Id. at 918 n. 2.