Elawyers Elawyers
Washington| Change

Rodrigo Gonzalez v. Hogg Insurance Group, Inc., 12-1159 (2012)

Court: Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit Number: 12-1159 Visitors: 8
Filed: Jun. 12, 2012
Latest Update: Mar. 26, 2017
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 12-1159 RODRIGO F. GONZALEZ, Plaintiff - Appellant, v. HOGG INSURANCE GROUP, INC., Defendant - Appellee, and EDWARD HOGG, Agency Owner, Defendant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Alexandria. Anthony J. Trenga, District Judge. (1:11-cv-00147-AJT-JDD) Submitted: May 30, 2012 Decided: June 12, 2012 Before MOTZ, KING, and DUNCAN, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curi
More
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 12-1159 RODRIGO F. GONZALEZ, Plaintiff - Appellant, v. HOGG INSURANCE GROUP, INC., Defendant - Appellee, and EDWARD HOGG, Agency Owner, Defendant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Alexandria. Anthony J. Trenga, District Judge. (1:11-cv-00147-AJT-JDD) Submitted: May 30, 2012 Decided: June 12, 2012 Before MOTZ, KING, and DUNCAN, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Rodrigo F. Gonzalez, Appellant Pro Se. Alan Steven Shachter, Manassas, Virginia, for Appellee. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. PER CURIAM: Rodrigo Gonzalez appeals the district court’s order granting summary judgment in favor of his former employer on his employment discrimination claims. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error in the court’s conclusion that Gonzalez failed to demonstrate that discrimination on account of Gonzalez’s religion was a motivating factor in his termination. Accordingly, we affirm the denial of that claim for the reasons stated by the district court. * Gonzalez v. Hogg Ins. Group, Inc., No. 1:11-cv-00147-AJT-IDD (E.D. Va. filed Jan. 6, 2012 & entered Jan. 9, 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 * Because Gonzalez’s informal brief does not challenge the basis for the district court’s disposition of his remaining claims, Gonzalez has forfeited appellate review of those claims. See 4th Cir. R. 34(b) (limiting review to issues raised in informal appellate brief). 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