Free Mandate of 9th Circuit - District Court of Arizona - Arizona


File Size: 122.6 kB
Pages: 4
Date: July 9, 2007
File Format: PDF
State: Arizona
Category: District Court of Arizona
Author: unknown
Word Count: 751 Words, 4,464 Characters
Page Size: 614.4 x 792 pts
URL

https://www.findforms.com/pdf_files/azd/34478/144.pdf

Download Mandate of 9th Circuit - District Court of Arizona ( 122.6 kB)


Preview Mandate of 9th Circuit - District Court of Arizona
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
DEBRA JILKA, No. 06-15702
D.C. No. CV-O3-Ol369-PHX-
Plaintiff- Appellant, MHM
V.
DRIVETIME AUTOMOTIVE GROUP, JUDGMENT
INC., aka Ugly Duckling Corporation, N (
Defendant - Appellee.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Arizona
(Phoenix). ,
This cause came on to be heard on the Transcript of the Record from the
United States District Court for the District of Arizona (Phoenix) and was duly
submitted.
On consideration whereof, it is now here ordered and adjudged by this
Court, that the judgment of the said District Court in this cause be, and hereby is
AFFIRMED. p I I I I
Filed and entered 06/ l l/07
000 % »
}§I[_|§él§TOf COL,/T.I‘U&QSON
I iu:. 0 0 2007 ;
5
b li _ f ,
Case 2:03-cv-01369-IVIHIVI Document 144 Filed 07/10/200 Page 1 of 4 `

i ’ 7 lg') _ .
l NOT FOR PUBLICATION
1 JUN 11 2007
1 ° UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS cAT|-IY A. cATTERsoN cLERK
y u.s. coum or AppéAn.s
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
DEBRA J ILKA, N0. 06-15702
Plaintiff- Appellant, D.C. N0. CV-03-0l369-PHX-
MHM
v.
DRIVETIME AUTOMOTIVE GROUP, MEMORANDUM *
INC., aka Ugly Duckling Corporation, ‘
Defendant - Appellee.
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the District of Arizona
Mary H. Murguia, District Judge, Presiding
Submitted June 5, 2007** A
Before: LEAVY, RYMER, and T.G. NELSON, Circuit Judges.
Debra Jilka appeals pro se from the district COU1'lL’S summary judgment in
favor of DriveTime Automotive Group, Inc. ("DriveTime"), in J ill the Age Discrimination in Employment Act of 1967 ("ADEA’_’) and the Family
* This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not
precedent except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.
H The panel unanimously finds this case suitable for decision without
oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2).
Case 2:03-cv-01369-IVIHIVI Document 144 Filed 07/10/2007 Page 2 of 4

and Medical Leave Act of 1993 ("FMLA"). .We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C.
§ 1291. We review summary judgment de novo, Lindahl v. Air France, 930 F.2d
1434, 1436 (9th Cir. 1991), and review an order granting a motion to strike for
abuse of discretion, Hambleton Br0s. Lumber C0. v. Balkin Enters., Inc., 397 F.3d
1217, 1224 n.4 (9th Cir. 2005). We affirm.
The district court did not err when it ruled that J ilka failed to establish a
prima facie case of age discrimination where J ilka did not offer evidence that she
performed her job satisfactorily or was replaced by an employee with equal or
inferior qualifications. See Coleman v. Quaker Oats C0., 232 F.3d 1271, 1280-81
(9th Cir. 2000). Further, the district court did not err when it concluded that, even
if J ilka had established a prima facie case under the ADEA, J ilka’s employer met
its burden to articulate a legitimate nondiscriminatory reason for terminating her
by presenting evidence of Ji1ka’s poor performance. See id. at 1282.
The district court did not err when it granted summary judgment on Ji1ka’s
FMLA claim because she failed to raise a genuine issue of material fact as to
whether her employment was terminated because she took FMLA-protected leave.
See Bachelder v. America WestAirlines, Inc., 259 F.3d 1112, 1125 (9th Cir.
200 1). l A 4
2
Case 2:03-cv-01369-IVIHIVI Document 144 Filed O7/10/2007 Page 3 of 4 l

Jilka also appeals the district cou1t’s striking of her response to DriveTime’s
reply and her response to DriveTime’s supplemental statement of facts in support
of its reply. The district court did not abuse its discretion by striking documents A
Jilka filed after scheduled briefing was already completed. Fed. R. Civ. P. 56;
Fed. R. Civ. P. 83.
We deny J ilka’s Request for Sanctions and Dismissal of Appellee’s Brief
for Untimely Filing, and we deny as moot J ilka’s Motion for Stay of the Taxation
of Costs Order Pending Appeal.
— AFFIRMED.
Arrest
_ JUL 0 3 2007
3 . »-s· a
Case 2:03-cv-01369-I\/IHI\/I Document 144 Filed 07/10/200 Page 4 of 4

Case 2:03-cv-01369-MHM

Document 144

Filed 07/10/2007

Page 1 of 4

Case 2:03-cv-01369-MHM

Document 144

Filed 07/10/2007

Page 2 of 4

Case 2:03-cv-01369-MHM

Document 144

Filed 07/10/2007

Page 3 of 4

Case 2:03-cv-01369-MHM

Document 144

Filed 07/10/2007

Page 4 of 4