be required. Id. Special rules of construction apply to evaluating summary judgment motions: the court must draw all reasonable inferences in favor of the nonmoving party, and it may not make credibility determinations or weigh the evidence. Lytle v. Household Mfg., Inc., 494 U.S. 545, 554-55, 110 S.Ct. 1331, 108 L.Ed.2d 504 (1990). “Credibility determinations, the weighing of the evidence, and the drawing of legitimate inferences from the facts are jury functions, not those of a.judge.” Reeves v. Sanderson Plumbing Products, Inc., 530 U.S. 133, 120 S.Ct. 2097, 147 L.Ed.2d 105 (2000). The Ninth Circuit has reiterated that a high standard exists for granting of summary judgment in employment discrimination cases. Schnidrig v. Columbia Machine, Inc., 80 F.3d 1406, 1410 (9th Cir. 1996) (<HOLDING>) (citations omitted); see also Lam v.
holding that courts should require very little evidence to survive summary judgment in a discrimination case because the ultimate question is one that can be resolved only through a searching inquiry  one that is most appropriately conducted by the factfinder upon a full record recognizing that the ultimate question of the voluntariness of consent is one of law holding that credibility determinations should not be resolved at the summary judgment stage holding that issue of whether death was proximately caused by intervenihg and superseding cause was not appropriately resolved by summary judgment holding that the issue of defendants actual knowledge should not be resolved on summary judgment but should be left to the trier of fact