Filed: Jan. 08, 2014
Latest Update: Mar. 02, 2020
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 13-2022 BETTINA JORDAN, Plaintiff – Appellant, v. PATRICK R. DONAHOE, United States Postal Service, Defendant - Appellee. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Richmond. John A. Gibney, Jr., District Judge. (3:12-cv-00054-JAG) Submitted: December 20, 2013 Decided: January 8, 2014 Before KEENAN, WYNN, and THACKER, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Bettina
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 13-2022 BETTINA JORDAN, Plaintiff – Appellant, v. PATRICK R. DONAHOE, United States Postal Service, Defendant - Appellee. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Richmond. John A. Gibney, Jr., District Judge. (3:12-cv-00054-JAG) Submitted: December 20, 2013 Decided: January 8, 2014 Before KEENAN, WYNN, and THACKER, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Bettina ..
More
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 13-2022 BETTINA JORDAN, Plaintiff – Appellant, v. PATRICK R. DONAHOE, United States Postal Service, Defendant - Appellee. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Richmond. John A. Gibney, Jr., District Judge. (3:12-cv-00054-JAG) Submitted: December 20, 2013 Decided: January 8, 2014 Before KEENAN, WYNN, and THACKER, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Bettina Jordan, Appellant Pro Se. Jonathan Holland Hambrick, Assistant United States Attorney, Richmond, Virginia, for Appellee. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. PER CURIAM: Bettina Jordan appeals the district court’s order granting summary judgment to Defendant in this action brought pursuant to Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, as amended, and the Rehabilitation Act of 1973. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. Jordan v. Donahoe, No. 3:12-cv-00054-JAG (E.D. Va. July 26, 2013). We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before this Court and argument would not aid the decisional process. AFFIRMED 2
