Filed: Jul. 19, 2001
Latest Update: Mar. 28, 2017
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 01-1630 TRINDA L. HEIKES, Plaintiff - Appellant, versus WILLIAM J. HENDERSON, Postmaster General, USPS; EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY COMMISSION, Defendants - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western Dis- trict of Virginia, at Roanoke. Samuel G. Wilson, Chief District Judge. (CA-01-268-7) Submitted: July 12, 2001 Decided: July 19, 2001 Before WILLIAMS, MICHAEL, and MOTZ, Circuit Judges. Affirmed b
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 01-1630 TRINDA L. HEIKES, Plaintiff - Appellant, versus WILLIAM J. HENDERSON, Postmaster General, USPS; EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY COMMISSION, Defendants - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western Dis- trict of Virginia, at Roanoke. Samuel G. Wilson, Chief District Judge. (CA-01-268-7) Submitted: July 12, 2001 Decided: July 19, 2001 Before WILLIAMS, MICHAEL, and MOTZ, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by..
More
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 01-1630 TRINDA L. HEIKES, Plaintiff - Appellant, versus WILLIAM J. HENDERSON, Postmaster General, USPS; EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY COMMISSION, Defendants - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western Dis- trict of Virginia, at Roanoke. Samuel G. Wilson, Chief District Judge. (CA-01-268-7) Submitted: July 12, 2001 Decided: July 19, 2001 Before WILLIAMS, MICHAEL, and MOTZ, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Trinda L. Heikes, Appellant Pro Se. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c). PER CURIAM: Trinda L. Heikes appeals the district court’s order dismissing her claim of discrimination, retaliation, and hostile work environ- ment pursuant to 28 U.S.C.A. § 1915 (West Supp. 2000). We have reviewed the record and the district court’s opinion and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm on the reasoning of the district court. Heikes v. Henderson, No. CA-01-268-7 (W.D. Va. filed Apr. 11, 2001; entered Apr. 12, 2001). We 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 2
