LUCIA WONG V. WELLS FARGO BANK, No. 11-35839 (9th Cir. 2012)

Annotate this Case

Download PDF

FILED NOT FOR PUBLICATION UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS DEC 21 2012 MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK U.S. COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT LUCIA WONG, No. 11-35839 Plaintiff - Appellant, D. C. No. 2:10-cv-00180-JCC v. WELLS FARGO BANK, NA, MEMORANDUM* Defendant - Appellee. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Washington John C. Coughenour, District Judge, Presiding Submitted December 19, 2012** Before: GOODWIN, WALLACE, and FISHER, Circuit Judges. Lucia Wong appeals pro se from the district court s summary judgment in her diversity action alleging unlawful termination based on race or ancestry in violation of Washington state law. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291. * This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3. ** The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2). We review de novo, Las Vegas Sands, LLC v. Nehme, 632 F.3d 526, 532 (9th Cir. 2011), and we affirm. The district court properly granted summary judgment because Wong failed to raise a genuine dispute of material fact as to whether she was performing satisfactorily for purposes of a prima facie case of discrimination and, in any event, whether Wells Fargo s legitimate, nondiscriminatory reason for terminating her was pretextual. See Milligan v. Thompson, 42 P.3d 418, 423 (Wash. Ct. App. 2002) (stating elements for a prima facie case of discrimination and explaining burden shifting framework); see also Carmen v. S.F. Unified Sch. Dist., 237 F.3d 1026, 1028 (9th Cir. 2001) (unsupported subjective statement about defendant s motive is insufficient to defeat summary judgment); F.T.C. v. Publ g Clearing House, Inc., 104 F.3d 1168, 1171 (9th Cir. 1997) (conclusory, self-serving affidavit lacking detailed facts and supporting evidence insufficient to create dispute of material fact). Contrary to Wong s contention on appeal, Wells Fargo s belief that Wong violated federal regulations constitutes a legitimate, nondiscriminatory reason for terminating her, even if Wong did not actually violate federal regulations. See Villiarimo v. Aloha Island Air, Inc., 281 F.3d 1054, 1063 (9th Cir. 2002) ( [C]ourts only require that an employer honestly believed its reason for its actions, even if its 2 11-35839 reason is foolish or trivial or even baseless. (citation and internal quotation marks omitted)). AFFIRMED. 3 11-35839

Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.