she has suffered adverse employment actions that violate retaliation laws. To establish a claim for retaliation, a plaintiff must establish that: (1) she engaged in a protected activity; (2) she suffered an adverse employment decision; and (3) there was a causal link between a plaintiffs activity and the employment decision. Lyons v. England, 307 F.3d 1092, 1118 (9th Cir.2002). An adverse employment action is one that is reasonably likely to deter an employee from engaging in protected activity. Ray v. Henderson, 217 F.3d 1234, 1242-43 (9th Cir.2000). The Ninth Circuit defines adverse employment actions in a broad manner. Id. at 1240. For example, lateral transfers and schedule changes may constitute adverse employment actions, while mere offensive comments by co 731-32 (9th Cir.1986) (<HOLDING>). The parties do not dispute that Watson
holding that although evidence that the alleged adverse action occurred shortly after the employer became aware of the protected activity is sufficient to make a prima facie causation case the opposite is equally true  a lengthy time lapse between the employer becoming aware of the protected activity and the alleged adverse employment action  negates any inference that a causal connection exists between the two 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 two months after protected activity holding that a threeyear gap between the protected activity and the adverse employment action was insufficient to support an inference of causation 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