satisfy the first element of her prima facie case. B. Causal Link The causal link between a protected activity and the alleged retaliatory action “can be inferred from timing alone” when there is a close proximity between the two. Villiarimo v. Aloha Island Air, Inc., 281 F.3d 1054, 1065 (9th Cir.2002). Here, Thomas recommended hiring Perry for the position on February 22, 2001, and continued to oppose Miller’s treatment of Perry thereafter. On April 11, approximately seven weeks after Thomas first supported Perry’s promotion, Miller informed Thomas that she was being placed on extended probation. We have held that events occurring within similar intervals of time are sufficiently proximate to support an inference of causation. See Yartzoff v. Thomas, 809 F.2d 1371, 1376 (9th Cir.1987) (<HOLDING>); Miller v. Fairchild Indus., Inc., 797 F.2d
holding that three and onehalf months between the filing of an eeoc charge and the adverse employment action was insufficient by itself to establish causation holding that a threeyear gap between the protected activity and the adverse employment action was insufficient to support an inference of causation holding that adverse employment activity that occurred 10 months and 17 months after protected activity was insufficient on its own to create a reasonable inference of causation holding that sufficient evidence of causation existed where adverse employment action occurred less than three months after the protected activity holding in a discrimination case that a close temporal proximity sufficient to survive summary judgment existed where the challenged employment action occurred one month after the protected activity