Filed: Dec. 21, 2004
Latest Update: Mar. 28, 2017
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 04-1636 KEVIN P. WELDON, Plaintiff - Appellant, versus DONALD L. EVANS, Secretary, Department of Commerce, Defendant - Appellee. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Alexandria. Claude M. Hilton, Chief District Judge. (CA-04-11-1) Submitted: November 30, 2004 Decided: December 21, 2004 Before MICHAEL, SHEDD, and DUNCAN, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 04-1636 KEVIN P. WELDON, Plaintiff - Appellant, versus DONALD L. EVANS, Secretary, Department of Commerce, Defendant - Appellee. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Alexandria. Claude M. Hilton, Chief District Judge. (CA-04-11-1) Submitted: November 30, 2004 Decided: December 21, 2004 Before MICHAEL, SHEDD, and DUNCAN, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. ..
More
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 04-1636 KEVIN P. WELDON, Plaintiff - Appellant, versus DONALD L. EVANS, Secretary, Department of Commerce, Defendant - Appellee. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Alexandria. Claude M. Hilton, Chief District Judge. (CA-04-11-1) Submitted: November 30, 2004 Decided: December 21, 2004 Before MICHAEL, SHEDD, and DUNCAN, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Kevin P. Weldon, Appellant Pro Se. Richard Parker, Dennis Carl Barghaan, Jr., Assistant United States Attorneys, Alexandria, Virginia, for Appellee. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c). PER CURIAM: Kevin P. Weldon appeals the district court’s order granting the Defendant’s motion for summary judgment and dismissing his action alleging claims under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, as amended, and constitutional claims. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm on the reasoning of the district court. See Weldon v. Evans, No. CA- 04-11-1 (E.D. Va. filed March 19, 2004; entered March 22, 2004). 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 - 2 -