Donna Lynn Bradley v. Caremark Rx LLC

NOT FOR PUBLICATION
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
DONNA LYNN BRADLEY,
Plaintiff - Appellant,
v.
CAREMARK RX LLC,
Defendant - Appellee.
No. 13-15677
D.C. No. 2:11-cv-00980-SRB
MEMORANDUM*
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the District of Arizona
Susan R. Bolton, District Judge, Presiding
Submitted November 18, 2014**
Before: LEAVY, FISHER, and N.R. SMITH, Circuit Judges.
Donna Lynn Bradley appeals pro se from the district court’s summary
judgment in her employment action alleging age and sex discrimination, and
retaliation, in connection with her termination. We have jurisdiction under 28
U.S.C. § 1291. We review de novo. Hawn v. Exec. Jet Mgmt., Inc., 615 F.3d
FILED
DEC 4 2014
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U.S. COURT OF APPEALS
* This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent
except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.
** The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision
without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2).

-- 1 of 2 --

1151, 1155 (9th Cir. 2010). We affirm.
The district court properly granted summary judgment on Bradley’s age
discrimination claim because Bradley failed to raise a genuine dispute of material
fact as to whether she was performing her job satisfactorily, or whether she was
replaced by a substantially younger employee with equal or inferior qualifications.
See Sheppard v. David Evans & Assocs., 694 F.3d 1045, 1049 (9th Cir. 2012)
(setting forth elements of prima facie case of discrimination under the Age
Discrimination in Employment Act).
The district court properly granted summary judgment on Bradley’s sex
discrimination claim because Bradley failed to raise a triable dispute as to whether
she was qualified for the job, or whether similarly situated men were treated more
favorably. See Villiarimo v. Aloha Island Air, Inc., 281 F.3d 1054, 1062 (9th Cir.
2002) (setting forth elements of prima facie case of sex discrimination under Title
VII).
The district court properly granted summary judgment on Bradley’s
retaliation claim because Bradley failed to raise a triable dispute as to whether
there was a causal link between any protected activity and her termination. See id.
at 1064 (setting forth elements of prima facie case of retaliation under Title VII).
AFFIRMED.
13-15677 2

-- 2 of 2 --