Elawyers Elawyers
Washington| Change

Leonard v. Goss, 04-2125 (2004)

Court: Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit Number: 04-2125 Visitors: 13
Filed: Dec. 20, 2004
Latest Update: Mar. 28, 2017
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 04-2125 CINDY R. LEONARD Plaintiff - Appellant, versus PORTER J. GOSS, Director, Central Intelligence Agency; HEIDI F.; WILLIAM F.; DOUGLAS B.; MARILEE J. LAYMAN; HERBERT B.; RONALD L.; DIANE E. FLORKOWSKI; WILLIAM CRUMB; SUSAN WATERMAN; JEANETTE MOORE; GARY C.; SHIRLEY S.; LYNDA M.; UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Defendants - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Alexandri
More
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 04-2125 CINDY R. LEONARD Plaintiff - Appellant, versus PORTER J. GOSS, Director, Central Intelligence Agency; HEIDI F.; WILLIAM F.; DOUGLAS B.; MARILEE J. LAYMAN; HERBERT B.; RONALD L.; DIANE E. FLORKOWSKI; WILLIAM CRUMB; SUSAN WATERMAN; JEANETTE MOORE; GARY C.; SHIRLEY S.; LYNDA M.; UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Defendants - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Alexandria. James C. Cacheris, Senior District Judge. (CA-03-1176-1) Submitted: December 16, 2004 Decided: December 20, 2004 Before MICHAEL, KING, and SHEDD, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Cindy R. Leonard, Appellant Pro Se. Leslie Bonner McClendon, OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, William Joseph Howard, Ralph Andrew Price, Jr., Assistant United States Attorneys, Alexandria, Virginia, for Appellees. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c). - 2 - PER CURIAM: Cindy R. Leonard appeals the district court’s order granting summary judgment in favor of her former employer in her employment discrimination action. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. See Leonard v. Tenet, No. CA-03- 1176-1 (E.D. Va. June 30, 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 - 3 -
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