United States Ninth Circuit

In this action brought by plaintiff-employee alleging violations of the Energy Reorganization Act (ERA) whistleblower protection provision concerning cleanup efforts of nuclear waste at the Hanford Nuclear Site in Washington State, the district court's dismissal of the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) from the suit and grant of summary judgment in defendant URS Corp.'s favor is affirmed, and the grant of summary judgment in defendant URS Energy & Construction's favor is reversed, where: 1) the ERA empowers whistleblowing employees at nuclear energy sites to bring anti-retaliation claims to federal court after one year of agency inaction; 2) dismissal of the DOE was proper because there was no administrative complaint pending against the DOE for one year before plaintiff filed suit against the DOE in federal court, and the ERA's administrative exhaustion requirement was not satisfied as against the DOE; 3) dismissal of URS Corp. for lack of administrative exhaustion was proper as URS Corp. was not adequately named in the original administrative complaint; 4) administrative exhaustion was sufficient as to URS Energy, as plaintiff gave adequate notice to URS Energy that it was the named respondent to his complaint; 5) there was sufficient evidence to create a triable issue as to whether plaintiff's whistleblowing activity was a contributing factor in the adverse employment action URS Energy took against him; and 6) plaintiff had a constitutional right to jury trial for his claims seeking money damages under the ERA.

Appellate Information

• Decided 03/04/2015
• Published 03/04/2015

Judges

• Berzon

Court

• United States Ninth Circuit

Counsel