Filed: May 11, 2005
Latest Update: Mar. 02, 2020
Summary: United States Court of Appeals FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT _ No. 04-1791 _ Alfonso A. Waldron, Jr., * * Appellant, * * Appeal from the United States v. * District Court for the * Eastern District of Missouri. The Boeing Company; International * Association of Machinists and * [UNPUBLISHED] Aerospace Workers, Lodge 837, * * Appellees. * _ Submitted: May 6, 2005 Filed: May 11, 2005 _ Before WOLLMAN, MURPHY, and BENTON, Circuit Judges. _ PER CURIAM. Alfonso A. Waldron, Jr., appeals the district court’s1
Summary: United States Court of Appeals FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT _ No. 04-1791 _ Alfonso A. Waldron, Jr., * * Appellant, * * Appeal from the United States v. * District Court for the * Eastern District of Missouri. The Boeing Company; International * Association of Machinists and * [UNPUBLISHED] Aerospace Workers, Lodge 837, * * Appellees. * _ Submitted: May 6, 2005 Filed: May 11, 2005 _ Before WOLLMAN, MURPHY, and BENTON, Circuit Judges. _ PER CURIAM. Alfonso A. Waldron, Jr., appeals the district court’s1 ..
More
United States Court of Appeals
FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT
___________
No. 04-1791
___________
Alfonso A. Waldron, Jr., *
*
Appellant, *
* Appeal from the United States
v. * District Court for the
* Eastern District of Missouri.
The Boeing Company; International *
Association of Machinists and * [UNPUBLISHED]
Aerospace Workers, Lodge 837, *
*
Appellees. *
___________
Submitted: May 6, 2005
Filed: May 11, 2005
___________
Before WOLLMAN, MURPHY, and BENTON, Circuit Judges.
___________
PER CURIAM.
Alfonso A. Waldron, Jr., appeals the district court’s1 adverse grant of summary
judgment in his action claiming employment discrimination and Labor Management
Relations Act violations, by his former employer and his union. Having carefully
reviewed the record and considered Waldron’s arguments, see Jacob-Mua v.
1
The Honorable Catherine D. Perry, United States District Judge for the Eastern
District of Missouri.
Veneman,
289 F.3d 517, 520 (8th Cir. 2002) (standard of review), we find no basis
for reversal.
Accordingly, we affirm. See 8th Cir. R. 47B. We also deny as moot the
Boeing Company’s motion to strike.
______________________________
-2-