Filed: Feb. 16, 2017
Latest Update: Mar. 03, 2020
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 16-1960 RI’CHA RI SANCHO, Plaintiff - Appellant, v. ANDERSON SCHOOL DISTRICT FOUR, Defendant - Appellee. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina, at Anderson. Henry M. Herlong, Jr., Senior District Judge. (8:15-cv-01353-HMH) Submitted: January 30, 2017 Decided: February 16, 2017 Before DIAZ and HARRIS, Circuit Judges, and DAVIS, Senior Circuit Judge. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam op
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 16-1960 RI’CHA RI SANCHO, Plaintiff - Appellant, v. ANDERSON SCHOOL DISTRICT FOUR, Defendant - Appellee. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina, at Anderson. Henry M. Herlong, Jr., Senior District Judge. (8:15-cv-01353-HMH) Submitted: January 30, 2017 Decided: February 16, 2017 Before DIAZ and HARRIS, Circuit Judges, and DAVIS, Senior Circuit Judge. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opi..
More
UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 16-1960
RI’CHA RI SANCHO,
Plaintiff - Appellant,
v.
ANDERSON SCHOOL DISTRICT FOUR,
Defendant - Appellee.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of
South Carolina, at Anderson. Henry M. Herlong, Jr., Senior
District Judge. (8:15-cv-01353-HMH)
Submitted: January 30, 2017 Decided: February 16, 2017
Before DIAZ and HARRIS, Circuit Judges, and DAVIS, Senior
Circuit Judge.
Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Ri’Cha ri Sancho, Appellant Pro Se. Allison Aiken Hanna, Mary
Allison Caudell, CHILDS & HALLIGAN, Columbia, South Carolina,
for Appellee.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
PER CURIAM:
Ri’Cha ri Sancho appeals the district court’s order
accepting the recommendation of the magistrate judge and
granting summary judgment to Anderson School District Four on
her claims of a hostile work environment, disparate treatment,
and retaliation, in violation of Title VII of the Civil Rights
Act of 1964, as amended, 42 U.S.C. §§ 2000e to 2000e–17 (2012).
We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error.
Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district
court. * Sancho v. Anderson Sch. Dist. Four, No. 8:15-cv-01353-
HMH (D.S.C. Aug. 3, 2016). 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
*
To the extent that Sancho requests a payment plan for her
mediation fee, Sancho should direct her request to the district
court in the first instance.
2