What is the test for a successful Title VII disparate treatment claim?

Evaluating a Title VII disparate treatment claim requires a three-step analysis. Texas Dep't of Community Affairs v. Burdine, 450 U.S. 248, 252-253 (1981). First, the plaintiff must present a prima facie case of discrimination, as discussed above. After the plaintiff establishes a prima facie case, the burden of production shifts to the employer to articulate a legitimate, nondiscriminatory reason for failing to hire the plaintiff. The burden then shifts back to the plaintiff to present evidence that the employer's legitimate reason is merely a pretext for discrimination. Id. The ultimate burden of persuasion rests upon the plaintiff at all times. Id. at 253.

This three-step analysis also applies to Title VII disparate treatment claims decided on summary judgment. Wallis v. J.R. Simplot Co., 26 F.3d 885 (9th Cir.1994). Summary judgment is not appropriate if a rational trier of fact could determine that the employer's actions were taken for discriminatory reasons. Id. at 889. To avoid summary judgment, the plaintiff must raise a genuine issue of material fact regarding whether the employer's stated reason is merely a pretext for discrimination. Id. at 890. The plaintiff must produce "specific, substantial evidence of pretext." Id. (quoting Steckl v. Motorola Inc., 703 F.2d 392, 393 (9th Cir.1983)).