Filed: Mar. 08, 2005
Latest Update: Mar. 28, 2017
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 04-1952 TOJUANNA BROWN, Plaintiff - Appellant, versus DENNIS DOLLAR, Chairman, National Credit Union Administration, Defendant - Appellee. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Alexandria. Claude M. Hilton, Chief District Judge. (CA-04-122) Submitted: February 28, 2005 Decided: March 8, 2005 Before LUTTIG, MOTZ, and TRAXLER, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opin
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 04-1952 TOJUANNA BROWN, Plaintiff - Appellant, versus DENNIS DOLLAR, Chairman, National Credit Union Administration, Defendant - Appellee. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Alexandria. Claude M. Hilton, Chief District Judge. (CA-04-122) Submitted: February 28, 2005 Decided: March 8, 2005 Before LUTTIG, MOTZ, and TRAXLER, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opini..
More
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 04-1952 TOJUANNA BROWN, Plaintiff - Appellant, versus DENNIS DOLLAR, Chairman, National Credit Union Administration, Defendant - Appellee. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Alexandria. Claude M. Hilton, Chief District Judge. (CA-04-122) Submitted: February 28, 2005 Decided: March 8, 2005 Before LUTTIG, MOTZ, and TRAXLER, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Tojuanna Brown, Appellant Pro Se. Dennis Carl Barghaan, Jr., Assistant United States Attorney, Alexandria, Virginia, for Appellee. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c). PER CURIAM: Tojuanna Brown appeals the district court’s order granting the Defendant’s motion to dismiss her employment discrimination action under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, as amended. We find that the district court correctly dismissed the action on the ground that Brown failed to timely exhaust her administrative remedies by contacting an EEO counselor within forty-five days of the alleged discriminatory event. 29 C.F.R. § 1614.105(a) (2004). Accordingly, we affirm the district court’s order. See Brown v. Dollar, No. CA-04-122 (E.D. Va. filed June 1, 2004 & entered June 2, 2004) (dismissing for the reasons stated from the bench). 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 -