In its three-page order issued on July 9, the appellate court said Dr. John ‘Jack’ Angello offered insufficient evidence to show that sex was a motivating factor for the termination of his employment a few years ago at NMC.
Angello, a former NMC employee, filed a lawsuit against NMC claiming he was discriminated.
The 9th Circuit Court, however, stated that “Angello also did not offer sufficient evidence of a causal link between the complaints and grievances he lodged and the adverse action taken against him as required for a retaliation claim.”
“Angello’s other contentions, including those regarding the Lt. Governor’s apparent support of the Pacific Rim program and the role of NMC’s Academic Council in approving pilot programs, are not persuasive,” it said.
NMC President Dr. Carmen Fernandez is happy with the court ruling saying the college is “pleased with the court’s decision.”
“This case has been in the courts for several years,” Fernandez said.
“We hope that the Ninth Circuit ruling will bring some finality to Mr. Angello’s tenuous claims so more focus can be afforded to our efforts in providing a high quality education for our students,” she added.
At the conclusion of the trial in the district court, Judge David Wiseman had ruled in favor of NMC, stating that “a review of all the testimony and documents demonstrates that, when finally given the opportunity to prove his allegations, Angello could not make out a prima facie case.”
To establish a prima facie claim for retaliation, Wiseman explained, that Angello “must show, by a preponderance of the evidence, that he engaged in a protected activity, that the defendant took an adverse employment action against him; and that there is a causal link between Angello’s protected activity and the adverse action.”
Wiseman said that Angello offered no direct and circumstantial evidence to support either of his claims.
