Opinion ID: 2820904
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 3

Heading: standard of review

Text: “The district court’s grant of a motion for summary judgment is reviewed de novo. The reviewing court applies the same standard used by the district court under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 56(c). Therefore, this court must determine, viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to the nonmoving party, whether any genuine issues of 1 “The Oregon disability discrimination statute is modeled after the ADA. Accordingly, we interpret [the statute] consistently with the ADA.” Hutton v. Elf Atochem N. Am., Inc., 273 F.3d 884, 891 n.1 (9th Cir. 2001) (citation omitted); see Or. Rev. Stat. § 659A.139(1) (“659A.103 to 659A.144 shall be construed to the extent possible in a manner that is consistent with any similar provisions of the [ADA].”). Mayo also alleged violations of the OFLA and the FMLA. He later withdrew those claims, so they are not before us. 6 MAYO V. PCC STRUCTURALS material fact exist and whether the district court correctly applied the relevant substantive law.” Hutton, 273 F.3d at 891 (citations omitted).