ORDERED that the order is reversed insofar as appealed from, on the law, with costs, the motion is granted, and the complaint is dismissed.
The defendant demonstrated the absence of a prima facie case of discrimination under Executive Law — 296 and that it had a facially valid, independent, and nondiscriminatory reason for the questioned conduct (see, Ferrante v. American Lung Assn., 90 N.Y.2d 623, 631). The burden then shifted to the plaintiff to raise a material issue of fact with respect to whether the claimed reason for the defendant's failure to promote her and for her termination was, in reality, merely a pretext for illegal discrimination (see, Texas Dept. of Community Affairs v. Burdine, 450 U.S. 248, 253; see also, McDonnell Douglas Corp. v. Green, 411 U.S. 792, 804; cf., Matter of Miller Brewing Co. v. State Div. of Human Rights, 66 N.Y.2d 937, 939). However, the plaintiff proffered nothing beyond bare, unsubstantiated assertions of animus towards her because of her race (see, Negron v. New York Med. Coll., 277 A.D.2d 292; Trovato v. Air Express Intl., 254 A.D.2d 349; Matter of Engoren v. County of Nassau, 163 A.D.2d 520, 521). There is ample evidence that the plaintiff was discharged, not because of unlawful discrimination, but because of her unsatisfactory job performance. Thus, the plaintiff failed to establish the existence of any material issue of fact (cf., Ferrante v. American Lung Assn., supra, at 631).
SANTUCCI, J.P., GOLDSTEIN, FEUERSTEIN and CRANE, JJ., concur.