Filed: Dec. 18, 2012
Latest Update: Mar. 26, 2017
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 12-2166 STACEY HAILEY, Plaintiff - Appellant, v. PATRICK R. DONAHOE, Postmaster General & Chief Executive Officer, United States Postal Service, Defendant - Appellee. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Virginia, at Lynchburg. Norman K. Moon, Senior District Judge. (6:11-cv-00022-NKM-RSB) Submitted: December 13, 2012 Decided: December 18, 2012 Before MOTZ, WYNN, and FLOYD, Circuit Judges. A
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 12-2166 STACEY HAILEY, Plaintiff - Appellant, v. PATRICK R. DONAHOE, Postmaster General & Chief Executive Officer, United States Postal Service, Defendant - Appellee. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Virginia, at Lynchburg. Norman K. Moon, Senior District Judge. (6:11-cv-00022-NKM-RSB) Submitted: December 13, 2012 Decided: December 18, 2012 Before MOTZ, WYNN, and FLOYD, Circuit Judges. Af..
More
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 12-2166 STACEY HAILEY, Plaintiff - Appellant, v. PATRICK R. DONAHOE, Postmaster General & Chief Executive Officer, United States Postal Service, Defendant - Appellee. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Virginia, at Lynchburg. Norman K. Moon, Senior District Judge. (6:11-cv-00022-NKM-RSB) Submitted: December 13, 2012 Decided: December 18, 2012 Before MOTZ, WYNN, and FLOYD, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Stacey Hailey, Appellant Pro Se. Thomas Linn Eckert, Assistant United States Attorney, Roanoke, Virginia, for Appellee. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. PER CURIAM: Stacey Hailey appeals the district court’s order denying relief on his claims of employment discrimination. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we grant Hailey’s application to proceed in forma pauperis and affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. Hailey v. Donahoe, No. 6:11-cv-00022-NKM-RSB (W.D. Va. July 30, 2012). 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
