ECHENIQUE v. CONVERGYS, 11-2421. (2012)
Court: Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
Number: infco20120530104
Visitors: 24
Filed: May 30, 2012
Latest Update: May 30, 2012
Summary: Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. PER CURIAM: Ivette Echenique appeals from the district court's order accepting the recommendation of the magistrate judge and dismissing her employment discrimination action. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. Echenique v. Convergys, No. 3:11-cv-00147-RJC-DCK (W.D.N.C. Dec. 5, 2011). To the extent that Echenique seeks to present new evid
Summary: Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. PER CURIAM: Ivette Echenique appeals from the district court's order accepting the recommendation of the magistrate judge and dismissing her employment discrimination action. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. Echenique v. Convergys, No. 3:11-cv-00147-RJC-DCK (W.D.N.C. Dec. 5, 2011). To the extent that Echenique seeks to present new evide..
More
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
PER CURIAM:
Ivette Echenique appeals from the district court's order accepting the recommendation of the magistrate judge and dismissing her employment discrimination action. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. Echenique v. Convergys, No. 3:11-cv-00147-RJC-DCK (W.D.N.C. Dec. 5, 2011). To the extent that Echenique seeks to present new evidence on appeal, we decline to consider it. See Phonometrics, Inc. v. Westin Hotel Co., 319 F.3d 1328, 1333 (Fed. Cir. 2003) ("We, as a court of review, generally do not consider evidence that has not been considered by the district court."); Theriot v. Parrish of Jefferson, 185 F.3d 477, 491 n.26 (5th Cir. 1999) ("An appellate court may not consider new evidence furnished for the first time on appeal."). We deny Echenique's motion for transcripts and dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before the court and argument would not aid the decisional process.
AFFIRMED.
Source: Leagle
