Jerald Parker v. CRC HEALTH OREGON, LLC, DBA Allied Health Services East

NOT FOR PUBLICATION
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
JERALD PARKER,
Plaintiff-Appellant,
v.
CRC HEALTH OREGON, LLC, DBA
Allied Health Services East,
Defendant-Appellee.
No. 20-35186
D.C. No. 3:19-cv-00265-MO
MEMORANDUM*
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the District of Oregon
Michael W. Mosman, District Judge, Presiding
Submitted March 2, 2021**
Portland, Oregon
Before: PAEZ and WATFORD, Circuit Judges, and TUNHEIM,*** District Judge.
Jerald Parker appeals from the district court’s judgment in favor of CRC
Health on Parker’s claims for employment discrimination, retaliation, and failure
* This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent
except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.
** The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision
without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2).
*** The Honorable John R. Tunheim, Chief United States District Judge
for the District of Minnesota, sitting by designation.
FILED
MAR 4 2021
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U.S. COURT OF APPEALS

-- 1 of 3 --

Page 2 of 3
to reinstate. We affirm.
1. The district court properly granted summary judgment to CRC Health as
to Parker’s discrimination and retaliation claims under O.R.S. §§ 659A.030 and
659A.040. Even assuming that Parker established a prima facie case, he failed to
raise a triable issue of fact as to pretext. See Little v. Windermere Relocation, Inc.,
301 F.3d 958, 969 (9th Cir. 2002). CRC Health stated that it fired Parker for two
reasons: (1) Parker sent inappropriate text messages to a patient of CRC Health’s
clinic; and (2) Parker cursed at his supervisor in front of patients. Parker
acknowledges having sent text messages to a patient, and he concedes that the
clinic had a zero-tolerance policy for inappropriate relationships with patients.
Parker also concedes that cursing in a work environment—even in frustration at his
work assignment and not directed at his supervisor—is another violation of clinic
policy that can result in termination. Both of these violations provide legitimate,
nondiscriminatory reasons for CRC Health’s decision to terminate Parker, and
Parker produced no evidence suggesting that CRC Health’s proffered reasons were
not the real reasons for his termination. See Villiarimo v. Aloha Island Air, Inc.,
281 F.3d 1054, 1063 (9th Cir. 2002).
2. The district court properly granted summary judgment on Parker’s
failure-to-reinstate claim as well. Although Parker argues on appeal that his
assignment working outside and picking up trash was not part of his job

-- 2 of 3 --

Page 3 of 3
description, he conceded in his deposition that this was part of his job duties prior
to taking medical leave. Thus, CRC Health reinstated Parker to his prior position
as a security guard, as required by O.R.S. § 659A.043.
AFFIRMED.

-- 3 of 3 --