Elawyers Elawyers
Washington| Change

Terry v. Director Complaint Division, 98-2616 (1999)

Court: Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit Number: 98-2616 Visitors: 14
Filed: Feb. 25, 1999
Latest Update: Mar. 01, 2020
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 98-2616 DONALD R. TERRY, Plaintiff - Appellant, versus DIRECTOR, COMPLAINT ADJUDICATION DIVISION, U.S. EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY COMMISSION, OFFICE OF FEDERAL OPERATIONS, Defendant - Appellee. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern Dis- trict of Virginia, at Norfolk. Rebecca B. Smith, District Judge. (CA-98-222) Submitted: January 26, 1999 Decided: February 25, 1999 Before NIEMEYER and WILLIAMS, Circui
More
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 98-2616 DONALD R. TERRY, Plaintiff - Appellant, versus DIRECTOR, COMPLAINT ADJUDICATION DIVISION, U.S. EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY COMMISSION, OFFICE OF FEDERAL OPERATIONS, Defendant - Appellee. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern Dis- trict of Virginia, at Norfolk. Rebecca B. Smith, District Judge. (CA-98-222) Submitted: January 26, 1999 Decided: February 25, 1999 Before NIEMEYER and WILLIAMS, Circuit Judges, and BUTZNER, Senior Circuit Judge. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Donald R. Terry, Appellant Pro Se. Michael Anson Rhine, OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Norfolk, Virginia; Lisa J. Banks, EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY COMMISSION, Washington, D.C., for Appellee. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c). PER CURIAM: Donald R. Terry appeals the district court’s order dismissing his complaint against the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission for failure to state a claim upon which relief can be granted. We have reviewed the record and the district court’s opinion and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm on the reasoning of the district court. See Terry v. Director, Complaint Adjudication Div., No. CA-98-222 (E.D. Va. Sept. 28, 1998). We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequate- ly presented in the materials before the court and argument would not aid the decisional process. 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