Filed: Jun. 05, 2012
Latest Update: Mar. 26, 2017
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 12-1085 BERNARD C. DUSE, JR., Plaintiff - Appellant, v. BARNES & NOBLE, INC., Defendant - Appellee. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Alexandria. T.S. Ellis, III, Senior District Judge. (1:11-cv-00875-TSE-TRJ) Submitted: May 31, 2012 Decided: June 5, 2012 Before KING, DUNCAN, and DIAZ, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Bernard C. Duse, Jr., Appellant
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 12-1085 BERNARD C. DUSE, JR., Plaintiff - Appellant, v. BARNES & NOBLE, INC., Defendant - Appellee. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Alexandria. T.S. Ellis, III, Senior District Judge. (1:11-cv-00875-TSE-TRJ) Submitted: May 31, 2012 Decided: June 5, 2012 Before KING, DUNCAN, and DIAZ, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Bernard C. Duse, Jr., Appellant ..
More
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 12-1085 BERNARD C. DUSE, JR., Plaintiff - Appellant, v. BARNES & NOBLE, INC., Defendant - Appellee. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Alexandria. T.S. Ellis, III, Senior District Judge. (1:11-cv-00875-TSE-TRJ) Submitted: May 31, 2012 Decided: June 5, 2012 Before KING, DUNCAN, and DIAZ, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Bernard C. Duse, Jr., Appellant Pro Se. Jennifer Kies Mammen, Philip James Meitl, Daniel Prywes, BRYAN CAVE, LLP, Washington, D.C., for Appellee. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. PER CURIAM: Bernard C. Duse, Jr., appeals the district court’s order adopting the magistrate judge’s recommendation to dismiss his employment discrimination claims against Defendant. Limiting our review to the issues raised in Duse’s informal brief, see 4th Cir. R. 34(b), we affirm the district court’s order. See Duse v. Barnes & Noble, Inc., No. 1:11-cv-00875-TSE- TRJ (E.D. Va. Jan. 6, 2012). 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
