Sharol McDade v. National American Indian Housing Council

This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent*
except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.
The Honorable Morris S. Arnold, United States Senior Circuit Judge**
for the Eighth Circuit, sitting by designation.
NOT FOR PUBLICATION
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
SHAROL MCDADE,
Plaintiff - Appellant,
v.
NATIONAL AMERICAN INDIAN
HOUSING COUNCIL,
Defendant - Appellee.
No. 11-15913
D.C. No. 3:09-cv-00225-LRH-
VPC
MEMORANDUM*
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the District of Nevada
Larry R. Hicks, District Judge, Presiding
Argued and Submitted September 11, 2012
Las Vegas, Nevada
Before: RAWLINSON, BYBEE, and ARNOLD**, Circuit Judges.
FILED
OCT 09 2012
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U .S. C OU R T OF APPE ALS

-- 1 of 2 --

2
Appellant Sharol McDade appeals the district court’s grant of summary
judgment in favor of the National American Indian Housing Council (NAIHC).
We have jurisdiction pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 1291, and now affirm.
McDade did not offer sufficient evidence to contradict the April NAIHC
Board Meeting minutes showing that NAIHC was considering relocating
McDade’s position from Reno, Nevada to Washington, D.C before McDade
disclosed her pregnancy. Thus, McDade failed to present sufficient evidence to
raise a factual dispute as to whether NAIHC had a discriminatory motive in
relocating McDade’s position. See Vasquez v. Cnty. of Los Angeles, 349 F.3d 634,
642 (9th Cir. 2004), as amended (“[A] plaintiff must put forward specific and
substantial evidence challenging the credibility of the employer’s motives.”)
(footnote reference omitted).
AFFIRMED.

-- 2 of 2 --