From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Wong v. Wells Fargo Bank, NA

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
Dec 21, 2012
501 F. App'x 664 (9th Cir. 2012)

Opinion

No. 11-35839 D. C. No. 2:10-cv-00180-JCC

12-21-2012

LUCIA WONG, Plaintiff - Appellant, v. WELLS FARGO BANK, NA, Defendant - Appellee.


NOT FOR PUBLICATION


MEMORANDUM

This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.


Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Western District of Washington

John C. Coughenour, District Judge, Presiding

Before: GOODWIN, WALLACE, and FISHER, Circuit Judges.

Lucia Wong appeals pro se from the district court's summary judgment in her diversity action alleging unlawful termination based on race or ancestry in violation of Washington state law. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291. We review de novo, Las Vegas Sands, LLC v. Nehme, 632 F.3d 526, 532 (9th Cir. 2011), and we affirm.

The district court properly granted summary judgment because Wong failed to raise a genuine dispute of material fact as to whether she was performing satisfactorily for purposes of a prima facie case of discrimination and, in any event, whether Wells Fargo's legitimate, nondiscriminatory reason for terminating her was pretextual. See Milligan v. Thompson, 42 P.3d 418, 423 (Wash. Ct. App. 2002) (stating elements for a prima facie case of discrimination and explaining burden shifting framework); see also Carmen v. S.F. Unified Sch. Dist., 237 F.3d 1026, 1028 (9th Cir. 2001) (unsupported subjective statement about defendant's motive is insufficient to defeat summary judgment); F.T.C. v. Publ'g Clearing House, Inc., 104 F.3d 1168, 1171 (9th Cir. 1997) (conclusory, self-serving affidavit lacking detailed facts and supporting evidence insufficient to create dispute of material fact).

Contrary to Wong's contention on appeal, Wells Fargo's belief that Wong violated federal regulations constitutes a legitimate, nondiscriminatory reason for terminating her, even if Wong did not actually violate federal regulations. See Villiarimo v. Aloha Island Air, Inc., 281 F.3d 1054, 1063 (9th Cir. 2002) ("[C]ourts only require that an employer honestly believed its reason for its actions, even if its reason is foolish or trivial or even baseless." (citation and internal quotation marks omitted)).

AFFIRMED.


Summaries of

Wong v. Wells Fargo Bank, NA

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
Dec 21, 2012
501 F. App'x 664 (9th Cir. 2012)
Case details for

Wong v. Wells Fargo Bank, NA

Case Details

Full title:LUCIA WONG, Plaintiff - Appellant, v. WELLS FARGO BANK, NA, Defendant …

Court:UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

Date published: Dec 21, 2012

Citations

501 F. App'x 664 (9th Cir. 2012)