Thanks for visiting! Welcome to a new way to research case law. You are viewing a free summary from Descrybe.ai. For citation and good law / bad law checking, legal issue analysis, and other advanced tools, explore our Legal Research Toolkit — not free, but close.
Glass v. Intel Corp.
Citation: 345 F. App'x 254Docket: No. 08-15715
Court: Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit; September 3, 2009; Federal Appellate Court
Kevin Glass appeals the district court's summary judgment favoring Intel Corporation and Kursad Kiziloglu regarding claims of age and disability discrimination under the Age Discrimination in Employment Act, the Americans with Disabilities Act, California’s Fair Employment and Housing Act, and other California laws. The appellate court affirms the district court’s decision, determining that there were no genuine issues of material fact related to discrimination claims. Glass did not provide sufficient direct evidence to support his allegations of age and disability discrimination. The district court properly utilized the McDonnell Douglas framework for evaluating circumstantial evidence. Intel presented a legitimate rationale for its employment actions based on Glass's negative performance evaluations, and Glass did not demonstrate that this reasoning was a pretext for discrimination. Additionally, Glass's claim of disability-based harassment was found to lack merit; the comments from his manager and treatment by colleagues did not meet the legal threshold for workplace harassment as established in previous case law. Moreover, Glass failed to provide evidence suggesting that Kiziloglu's behavior constituted an assault under California law, which requires a clear intent and capability to inflict injury. The appellate court's disposition is not intended for publication and holds no precedential value, except as specified by 9th Circuit Rule 36-3.