Elawyers Elawyers
Ohio| Change

Curtis v. Chertoff, 08-40978 (2009)

Court: Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit Number: 08-40978 Visitors: 139
Filed: Mar. 23, 2009
Latest Update: Feb. 21, 2020
Summary: IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT United States Court of Appeals Fifth Circuit FILED March 23, 2009 No. 08-40978 Charles R. Fulbruge III Summary Calendar Clerk AUSTIN L CURTIS Plaintiff-Appellant v. MICHEAL CHERTOFF, INDIVIDUALLY AND AS SECRETARY, DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY Defendant-Appellee Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Texas 4:07-CV-307 Before DAVIS, GARZA, and PRADO, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM:* Austin L. Curtis appeal
More
           IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
                    FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT  United States Court of Appeals
                                                    Fifth Circuit

                                                 FILED
                                                                           March 23, 2009

                                     No. 08-40978                      Charles R. Fulbruge III
                                   Summary Calendar                            Clerk



AUSTIN L CURTIS

                                                   Plaintiff-Appellant
v.

MICHEAL CHERTOFF, INDIVIDUALLY AND AS SECRETARY,
DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

                                                   Defendant-Appellee




                   Appeal from the United States District Court
                         for the Eastern District of Texas
                                   4:07-CV-307


Before DAVIS, GARZA, and PRADO, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM:*
       Austin L. Curtis appeals the dismissal of his various employment-
discrimination claims on summary judgment. We review a grant of summary
judgment de novo, applying the same standard as the district court. Robinson
v. Orient Marine Co. Ltd., 
505 F.3d 364
, 365 (5th Cir. 2007). For the reasons set
forth by the district court, Curtis failed to meet his responsive burden on



       *
         Pursuant to 5TH CIR . R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not
be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH CIR .
R. 47.5.4.
                           No. 08-40978

summary judgment.   Accordingly, the judgment of the district court is
AFFIRMED.




                                 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