Opinion
No. 05-56411.
This panel unanimously finds this case suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed.R.App.P. 34(a)(2).
Filed June 14, 2007.
Andrew M. Schwartz, Los Angeles, CA, for Plaintiff-Appellant.
Gwendolyn Millicent Gamble, Esq., Office of the U.S. Attorney, Civil Tax Divisions, Los Angeles, CA, for Defendant-Appellee.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Central District of California, William J. Rea, District Judge, Presiding. D.C. No. CV-03-07455-WJR.
Before: D.W. NELSON, REINHARDT, and RYMER, Circuit Judges.
MEMORANDUM
This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.
The Navy established legitimate, performance-based reasons for terminating Power. Assuming, arguendo, that Power made out a prima facie case on his retaliation and disability discrimination claims, he failed to produce any evidence sufficient to support a conclusion that the explanation articulated by the Navy was pretextual. Villiarimo v. Aloha Island Air, Inc., 281 F.3d 1054, 1062, 1064 (9th Cir. 2002). Power makes no argument in his brief regarding his whistleblowing claim and thus has waived that claim. Kohler v. Inter-Tel Techs., 244 F.3d 1167, 1182 (9th Cir. 2001). He also failed to identify any procedural error that requires us to disturb the MSPB's decision. See Sloan v. West, 140 F.3d 1255, 1260 (9th Cir. 1998).