MARGARET HAUGHTON V. MEGAN BRENNAN, No. 16-35674 (9th Cir. 2017)

Annotate this Case
Download PDF
NOT FOR PUBLICATION UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FILED AUG 16 2017 MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT MARGARET ANN HAUGHTON, Plaintiff-Appellant, U.S. COURT OF APPEALS No. 16-35674 D.C. No. 3:15-cv-00888-HZ v. MEMORANDUM* MEGAN J. BRENNAN, Postmaster General, US Postal Service, Defendant-Appellee. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Oregon Marco A. Hernandez, District Judge, Presiding Submitted August 9, 2017** Before: SCHROEDER, TASHIMA, and M. SMITH, Circuit Judges. Margaret Ann Haughton appeals pro se from the district court’s summary judgment in her Title VII action alleging a retaliation claim. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291. We review de novo. Vasquez v. County of Los Angeles, 349 F.3d 634, 639 (9th Cir. 2004). We affirm. * This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3. ** The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2). The district court properly granted summary judgment on Haughton’s retaliatory hostile work environment claim because Haughton failed to raise a genuine dispute of material fact as to whether she was subjected to conduct that was severe or pervasive enough to alter the conditions of her employment. See Ray v. Henderson, 217 F.3d 1234, 1240, 1245 (9th Cir. 2000) (“To determine whether an environment is sufficiently hostile, we look to the totality of the circumstances, including the frequency of the discriminatory conduct; its severity; whether it is physically threatening or humiliating, or a mere offensive utterance; and whether it unreasonably interferes with an employee’s work performance.” (citation and internal quotation marks omitted)). AFFIRMED. 2 16-35674

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.