OpenJurist

843 F2d 501 Collins v. Lehman

843 F.2d 501

Unpublished Disposition

Fredric COLLINS, Sr., Plaintiff-Appellant,
v.
John LEHMAN, Secretary of the Navy, Defendant-Appellee.

NOTICE: Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3 provides that dispositions other than opinions or orders designated for publication are not precedential and should not be cited except when relevant under the doctrines of law of the case, res judicata, or collateral estoppel.

1

No. 86-5990.

2

United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.

Submitted March 7, 1988.*
Decided March 24, 1988.

3

Before FARRIS and REINHARDT, Circuit Judges, and HOWARD D. McKIBBEN, District Judge***

4

MEMORANDUM**

5

Frederic Collins appeals from a summary judgment entered by the district court in favor of John Lehman, Secretary of the Navy. We affirm.

6

Collins argues that he was unlawfully discriminated against when he was not selected for the position of Electroplater with the Long Beach Naval Shipyards. This claim fails because on the record before us, and accepting the evidence offered by Collins as true, this evidence does not establish a prima facie case of discrimination under Title VII. See Texas Dept. of Community Affairs v. Burdine, 450 U.S. 248, 253-54 (1981); McDonnell Douglas Corporation v. Green, 411 U.S. 792, 802 (1973).

7

All three individuals hired for the Electroplater openings were rated higher than Collins on the list of eligible applicants. One of the three persons hired is Hispanic. A job freeze prevented the shipyards from hiring additional applicants. Finally, there is no evidence to support the assertion by Collins that the Certificate of Eligibles was a forgery.

8

We sympathize with Collins' attempts to secure a better position and understand his concerns regarding discrimination. Nevertheless, he fails to set forth specific facts, beyond his unsupported allegations, that give rise to an inference that he was denied the Electroplater job because of racial discrimination. See Hagans v. Andrus, 651 F.2d 622, 625-26 (9th Cir.1981). Under these circumstances, we have no choice but to affirm the district court.

9

Because there was no genuine issue for trial, we hold that the district court properly dismissed Collins' action against Lehman. Appellee's request for attorneys' fees and double costs is denied.

10

AFFIRMED.

*

The panel unanimously finds this case suitable for decision without oral argument. Fed.R.App.P. 34(a) and 9th Cir.Rule 34-4

**

This disposition is not appropriate for publication and may not be cited to or by the courts of this circuit except as provided by 9th Cir.R. 36-3

***

Honorable Howard D. McKibben, United States District Judge, District of Nevada, sitting by designation