Chidi N. Anunka v. Amazon Service International, Inc.

NOT FOR PUBLICATION
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
CHIDI N. ANUNKA,
Plaintiff-Appellant,
v.
AMAZON SERVICE INTERNATIONAL,
INC.,
Defendant-Appellee.
No. 22-35094
D.C. No. 3:20-cv-06252-BHS
MEMORANDUM*
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Western District of Washington
Benjamin H. Settle, District Judge, Presiding
Submitted January 18, 2023**
Before: GRABER, PAEZ, and NGUYEN, Circuit Judges.
Chidi N. Anunka appeals pro se from the district court’s summary judgment
in his action alleging violations of the Age Discrimination in Employment Act
(“ADEA”). We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291. We review de novo.
Shelley v. Geren, 666 F.3d. 599, 604 (9th Cir. 2012). We affirm.
* This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent
except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.
** The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision
without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2).
FILED
JAN 27 2023
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U.S. COURT OF APPEALS

-- 1 of 2 --

2 22-35094
The district court properly granted summary judgment on Anunka’s ADEA
claims because Anunka failed to exhaust his administrative remedies. See
29 U.S.C. § 626(d)(1) (ADEA plaintiff must file a timely charge with the Equal
Employment Opportunity Commission before commencing a civil action).
We do not consider claims that Anunka failed to allege in his complaint. See
Pickern v. Pier 1 Imports (U.S.), Inc., 457 F.3d 963, 969 (9th Cir. 2006) (affirming
summary judgment where the complaint did not give fair notice of the factual basis
for a claim raised for the first time in opposition to summary judgment).
We do not consider arguments and allegations raised for the first time on
appeal. See Padgett v. Wright, 587 F.3d 983, 985 n.2 (9th Cir. 2009).
Anunka’s motion for relief (Docket Entry No. 16) is denied.
AFFIRMED.

-- 2 of 2 --