Filed: Feb. 01, 2005
Latest Update: Mar. 28, 2017
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 04-2193 JAMES W. HOCKADAY, Plaintiff - Appellant, versus LES BROWNLEE, Acting Secretary of the Army, Department of the Army; JOSEPH P. HILL; NELSON A. CROSS; JOHN V. GUENTHER, Lieutenant Colonel; EDWARD D. MILLER, JR., Commander, Fort Monroe, Defendants - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Newport News. Rebecca Beach Smith, District Judge. (CA-03-149-4) Submitted: J
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 04-2193 JAMES W. HOCKADAY, Plaintiff - Appellant, versus LES BROWNLEE, Acting Secretary of the Army, Department of the Army; JOSEPH P. HILL; NELSON A. CROSS; JOHN V. GUENTHER, Lieutenant Colonel; EDWARD D. MILLER, JR., Commander, Fort Monroe, Defendants - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Newport News. Rebecca Beach Smith, District Judge. (CA-03-149-4) Submitted: Ja..
More
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 04-2193 JAMES W. HOCKADAY, Plaintiff - Appellant, versus LES BROWNLEE, Acting Secretary of the Army, Department of the Army; JOSEPH P. HILL; NELSON A. CROSS; JOHN V. GUENTHER, Lieutenant Colonel; EDWARD D. MILLER, JR., Commander, Fort Monroe, Defendants - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Newport News. Rebecca Beach Smith, District Judge. (CA-03-149-4) Submitted: January 27, 2005 Decided: February 1, 2005 Before LUTTIG and DUNCAN, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. James W. Hockaday, Appellant Pro Se. George Maralan Kelley, III, Assistant United States Attorney, Norfolk, Virginia, for Appellees. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c). PER CURIAM: James W. Hockaday appeals the district court’s order dismissing his 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 Hockaday v. Brownlee, No. CA-03-149-4 (E.D. Va. July 19, 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 -