Rucker v. Potter

Full title: Harold J. RUCKER, Plaintiff--Appellant, v. John E. POTTER, [*] Postmaster…

Court: United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit

Date published: Feb 21, 2002

31 F. App'x 420 (9th Cir. 2002)

Opinion

31 Fed.Appx. 420 (9th Cir. 2002) Harold J. RUCKER, Plaintiff--Appellant, v. John E. POTTER, ^* Postmaster General, Postmaster General of the U.S. Postal Service; et al., Defendants--Appellees. No. 01-16052. D.C. No. CV-99-03082-CW. United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit. February 21, 2002

Submitted February 11, 2002. ^**

** Because the panel unanimously finds this case suitable for decision without oral argument, Rucker's request for oral argument is denied. See Fed. R.App. P. 34(a)(2).

NOT FOR PUBLICATION. (See Federal Rule of Appellate Procedure Rule 36-3)

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of California; Claudia Wilken, District Judge, Presiding.

Before B. FLETCHER, T.G. NELSON, and TALLMAN, Circuit Judges.

MEMORANDUM ^***

*** This disposition is not appropriate for publication and may not be cited to or by the courts of this circuit except as may be provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.

Harold J. Rucker appeals pro se the district court's dismissal of his Title VII claim alleging race, color and gender discrimination in addition to retaliation. We review de novo a dismissal for failure to state a claim, Kimes v. Stone, 84 F.3d 1121, 1126 (9th Cir.1996), and we affirm.

The district court properly dismissed Rucker's amended complaint because it failed to state a prima facie claim for discrimination due to race or gender, see Breneman v. Kennecott Corp., 799 F.2d 470, 474 (9th Cir.1986), or for retaliation pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 2000e-3, see Hashimoto v. Dalton, 118 F.3d 671, 679 (9th Cir.1997).

Rucker's remaining contentions lack merit.

AFFIRMED.