Elawyers Elawyers
Ohio| Change

Akers v. Gutierrez, 09-1028 (2009)

Court: Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit Number: 09-1028 Visitors: 33
Filed: Aug. 03, 2009
Latest Update: Mar. 28, 2017
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 09-1028 GEOFFREY R. AKERS, DR., P.E.-, Plaintiff - Appellant, v. CARLOS GUTIERREZ, Secretary of Commerce; PATRICIA BOYLAN, Director-OCR/US Patent Office, Defendants - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Alexandria. Claude M. Hilton, Senior District Judge. (1:07-cv-01000-CMH-TCB) Submitted: July 30, 2009 Decided: August 3, 2009 Before MOTZ, KING, and DUNCAN, Circuit J
More
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 09-1028 GEOFFREY R. AKERS, DR., P.E.-, Plaintiff - Appellant, v. CARLOS GUTIERREZ, Secretary of Commerce; PATRICIA BOYLAN, Director-OCR/US Patent Office, Defendants - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Alexandria. Claude M. Hilton, Senior District Judge. (1:07-cv-01000-CMH-TCB) Submitted: July 30, 2009 Decided: August 3, 2009 Before MOTZ, KING, and DUNCAN, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Geoffrey R. Akers, Appellant Pro Se. Dennis Carl Barghaan, Jr., Monika L. Moore, Catherine DeRoever Wood, Assistant United States Attorneys, Alexandria, Virginia, for Appellees. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. PER CURIAM: Geoffrey R. Akers appeals the district court’s order granting summary judgment in favor of the defendants 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. Akers v. Gutierrez, No. 1:07-cv-01000-CMH-TCB (E.D. Va. filed July 30, 2008 & entered Aug. 1, 2008). We deny Akers’ motion for a copy of the record. 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
Source:  CourtListener

Can't find what you're looking for?

Post a free question on our public forum.
Ask a Question
Search for lawyers by practice areas.
Find a Lawyer