The following excerpt is from Quintero v. Merced Unified Sch. Dist., 1:20-cv-01439-NONE-BAM (E.D. Cal. 2021):
Title VII prohibits adverse employment actions against an employee who has "opposed any practice made an unlawful employment practice by this subchapter [(Title VII)]" or who has "made a charge, testified, assisted, or participated in any manner in an investigation, proceeding, or hearing under this subchapter." 42 U.S.C. 2000e-3. The analysis of a retaliation case is similar to that of a discrimination case under Title VII, where the plaintiff must establish a prima facie case of retaliation, then the employer must articulate a legitimate, non-retaliatory reason for its action, and the plaintiff must show that the employer's reason is a pretext. See Stegall v. Citadel Broadcasting Co., 350 F.3d 1061, 1065 (9th Cir. 2003). To state a claim under Title VII, Plaintiff must show that he was is an individual employed by an employer. 42 U.S.C. 2000e(f); Kelley v. City of Albuquerque, 542 F.3d 802 (10th Cir. 2008).
The above passage should not be considered legal advice. Reliable answers to complex legal questions require comprehensive research memos. To learn more visit www.alexi.com.