Filed: May 08, 2015
Latest Update: Mar. 02, 2020
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 14-2128 TIMOTHY VALENZIA, Plaintiff - Appellant, v. BALTIMORE CITY BOARD OF SCHOOL COMMISSIONERS, Defendant - Appellee. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Maryland, at Baltimore. Catherine C. Blake, Chief District Judge. (1:12-cv-00243-CCB) Submitted: April 30, 2015 Decided: May 8, 2015 Before NIEMEYER and AGEE, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 14-2128 TIMOTHY VALENZIA, Plaintiff - Appellant, v. BALTIMORE CITY BOARD OF SCHOOL COMMISSIONERS, Defendant - Appellee. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Maryland, at Baltimore. Catherine C. Blake, Chief District Judge. (1:12-cv-00243-CCB) Submitted: April 30, 2015 Decided: May 8, 2015 Before NIEMEYER and AGEE, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam ..
More
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 14-2128 TIMOTHY VALENZIA, Plaintiff - Appellant, v. BALTIMORE CITY BOARD OF SCHOOL COMMISSIONERS, Defendant - Appellee. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Maryland, at Baltimore. Catherine C. Blake, Chief District Judge. (1:12-cv-00243-CCB) Submitted: April 30, 2015 Decided: May 8, 2015 Before NIEMEYER and AGEE, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. John H. Morris, Jr., Baltimore, Maryland, for Appellant. Darryl G. McCallum, SHAWE & ROSENTHAL, LLP, Baltimore, Maryland, for Appellee. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. PER CURIAM: Timothy Valenzia appeals from the district court’s order granting summary judgment in favor of the Baltimore City Board of School Commissioners in his employment discrimination action. We have reviewed the record and the parties’ arguments on appeal, and we find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. Valenzia v. Baltimore City Bd. of Sch. Comm’rs, No. 1:12-cv-00243-CCB (D. Md. Sept. 17, 2014). 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