Filed: Nov. 22, 2005
Latest Update: Mar. 28, 2017
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 05-1720 MILES L. WATERS, Plaintiff - Appellant, versus MOTOR VEHICLE ADMINISTRATION, Defendant - Appellee, and LARRY WESCOTT; GEORGE ATKINSON; RALPH JACKSON, Fixed Assets Sup., Defendants. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Maryland, at Baltimore. J. Frederick Motz, District Judge. (CA- 04-1254; CA-04-1255) Submitted: November 17, 2005 Decided: November 22, 2005 Before WILKINSON, LUTTIG, and WILLI
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 05-1720 MILES L. WATERS, Plaintiff - Appellant, versus MOTOR VEHICLE ADMINISTRATION, Defendant - Appellee, and LARRY WESCOTT; GEORGE ATKINSON; RALPH JACKSON, Fixed Assets Sup., Defendants. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Maryland, at Baltimore. J. Frederick Motz, District Judge. (CA- 04-1254; CA-04-1255) Submitted: November 17, 2005 Decided: November 22, 2005 Before WILKINSON, LUTTIG, and WILLIA..
More
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 05-1720 MILES L. WATERS, Plaintiff - Appellant, versus MOTOR VEHICLE ADMINISTRATION, Defendant - Appellee, and LARRY WESCOTT; GEORGE ATKINSON; RALPH JACKSON, Fixed Assets Sup., Defendants. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Maryland, at Baltimore. J. Frederick Motz, District Judge. (CA- 04-1254; CA-04-1255) Submitted: November 17, 2005 Decided: November 22, 2005 Before WILKINSON, LUTTIG, and WILLIAMS, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Miles L. Waters, Appellant Pro Se. Leight Douglas Collins, Assistant Attorney General, Robert Carson Cain, II, OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL, Glen Burnie, Maryland, for Appellee. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c). - 2 - PER CURIAM: Miles L. Waters appeals the district court’s order denying relief in his employment discrimination action. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. See Waters v. Motor Vehicle Admin., Nos. CA-04-1254, CA-04-1255 (D. Md. Apr. 12, 2005). 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 - 3 -