Check how courts have cited this case. Use our free citator for the most current treatment.
No. 8646255
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
Patterson v. Vanderver
No. 8646255 · Decided December 12, 2007
No. 8646255·Ninth Circuit · 2007·
FlawFinder last updated this page Apr. 2, 2026
Case Details
Court
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
Decided
December 12, 2007
Citation
No. 8646255
Disposition
See opinion text.
Full Opinion
MEMORANDUM ** Tommie G. Patterson appeals pro se from the district court’s summary judgment in his Title VII action alleging that defendants discriminated against him based on his race and sex, and tampered with his mail. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291 . We review de novo, Munger v. City of Glasgow Police Dept., 227 F.3d 1082 , 1085 (9th Cir.2000), and we affirm. The district court properly granted summary judgment on Patterson’s Title VII claims, because it correctly concluded that Patterson was an “independent contractor” not an “employee” of Regal Entertainment. See Adcock v. Chrysler Corp., 166 F.3d 1290, 1292 (9th Cir.1999) (Title VII protects employees, but does not protect independent contractors). Patterson’s contention that the district court was biased against him is not supported by the record. Patterson’s remaining contention regarding mail tampering also lacks merit. AFFIRMED. This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.
Plain English Summary
Patterson appeals pro se from the district court’s summary judgment in his Title VII action alleging that defendants discriminated against him based on his race and sex, and tampered with his mail.
Key Points
01Patterson appeals pro se from the district court’s summary judgment in his Title VII action alleging that defendants discriminated against him based on his race and sex, and tampered with his mail.
02City of Glasgow Police Dept., 227 F.3d 1082 , 1085 (9th Cir.2000), and we affirm.
03The district court properly granted summary judgment on Patterson’s Title VII claims, because it correctly concluded that Patterson was an “independent contractor” not an “employee” of Regal Entertainment.
04Chrysler Corp., 166 F.3d 1290, 1292 (9th Cir.1999) (Title VII protects employees, but does not protect independent contractors).
Frequently Asked Questions
Patterson appeals pro se from the district court’s summary judgment in his Title VII action alleging that defendants discriminated against him based on his race and sex, and tampered with his mail.
FlawCheck shows no negative treatment for Patterson v. Vanderver in the current circuit citation data.
This case was decided on December 12, 2007.
Use the citation No. 8646255 and verify it against the official reporter before filing.