UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT Northern District of California
November 29, 2011
COMERLIS DELANEY, PLAINTIFF,
The opinion of the court was delivered by: Maria-Elena James Chief United States Magistrate Judge
QUESTIONS FOR DECEMBER 1, 2011 HEARING
To assist the Court in its consideration of Defendant's pending Motion for Summary Judgment (Dkt. #22), the Court issues the following questions for the parties to address at the December 1, 2011 hearing: 15 1. Both parties assume that the legal standard that the Court should apply in evaluating D 16 Plaintiff's Motion is the three-stage burden shifting analysis from McDonnell Douglas Corp. v. Green, 411 U.S. 792 (1973).
Neither of the parties, however, address the Ninth Circuit's rulings in Bachelder v. America West Airlines, Inc., 259 F.3d 1112 (9th Cir. 2001), and Xin Liu v. Amway 19 Corp., 347 F.3d 1125 (9th Cir. 2003), and their application to Plaintiff's second cause of action 20 under the FMLA and the CFRA. How do these cases affect the legal standard that the Court should 21 apply? 22 2. Can Plaintiff's first cause of action (FEHA) be evaluated under the same legal standard as 23 Plaintiff's second cause of action (FMLA/CFRA)? 24
IT IS SO ORDERED.
© 1992-2011 VersusLaw Inc.