national origin discrimination

We invite you to review our newly-posted January 2023 California Employment Law Notes, a comprehensive review of the latest and most significant developments in California employment law. The highlights include:

Opara v. Yellin, 57 F.4th 709 (9th Cir. 2023)

Joan Opara was terminated from her employment as an IRS revenue officer after the IRS determined she had committed several “UNAX offenses” (i.e., incidents of unauthorized access of taxpayer data). Following her termination, Opara sued the Treasury Secretary, alleging she was terminated in violation of the Age Discrimination in Employment Act and Title VII for,

Zeinali v. Raytheon Co., 636 F.3d 544 (9th Cir. 2011)

Hossein Zeinali, who is of Iranian descent, sued Raytheon for race and national origin discrimination under the Fair Employment and Housing Act when it terminated his employment after he was denied a security clearance by the Department of Defense. The district court granted summary judgment to Raytheon, but the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals

Nadaf-Rahrov v. Neiman Marcus Group, Inc., 166 Cal. App. 4th 952 (2008)

Forough Nadaf-Rahrov worked as a clothes fitter for Neiman Marcus in Dallas before transferring to San Francisco in the mid- 1990s. She suffered from recurrent back and joint pain and was diagnosed with carpal tunnel syndrome and osteoarthritis. In November 2003, she commenced a requested family medical leave of absence, which was

Mamou v. Trendwest Resorts, Inc., 165 Cal. App. 4th 686 (2008)

Tamer Mamou was employed as a project director for Trendwest (a company that sells timeshares at various resort locations) when he was terminated after approximately 12 years of employment. Trendwest terminated Mamou after it became aware that he had filed documents with the California Secretary of State in which it appeared Mamou was

Villanueva v. City of Colton, 160 Cal. App. 4th 1188 (2008)

After Daniel Villanueva was demoted from Lead Operator to Operator II, he sued the city for discrimination based on race, national origin, ethnicity or skin color and for retaliation for his having complained about the alleged discrimination. The trial court granted summary judgment to the city after concluding Villanueva had made “unsupported charges

Ramanathan v. Bank of America, 155 Cal. App. 4th 1017 (2007)

Padmanabhan Ramanathan alleged he was discriminated against and harassed as a result of his religion (Hindu), race (Asian) and national origin. In its summary judgment motion, the Bank asserted that Ramanathan was a “Vice President” who served “at the pleasure” of the board of directors pursuant to the National Bank Act (12 U.S.C.