Elawyers Elawyers
Ohio| Change

Satterfield v. US Dept Labor, 06-1838 (2007)

Court: Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit Number: 06-1838 Visitors: 12
Filed: Jan. 30, 2007
Latest Update: Mar. 28, 2017
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 06-1838 JESSE LOWELL SATTERFIELD, Plaintiff - Appellant, versus UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF LABOR; MINE SAFETY AND HEALTH ADMINISTRATION, Defendants - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of West Virginia, at Clarksburg. Irene M. Keeley, Chief District Judge. (1:03-cv-00165-IMK) Submitted: January 12, 2007 Decided: January 30, 2007 Before WILKINSON and NIEMEYER, Circuit Judges, and
More
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 06-1838 JESSE LOWELL SATTERFIELD, Plaintiff - Appellant, versus UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF LABOR; MINE SAFETY AND HEALTH ADMINISTRATION, Defendants - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of West Virginia, at Clarksburg. Irene M. Keeley, Chief District Judge. (1:03-cv-00165-IMK) Submitted: January 12, 2007 Decided: January 30, 2007 Before WILKINSON and NIEMEYER, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Jesse Lowell Satterfield, Appellant Pro Se. Daniel W. Dickinson, Jr., OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Wheeling, West Virginia, for Appellees. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. PER CURIAM: Jesse Lowell Satterfield appeals the district court’s orders granting the Appellees’ motion for summary judgment and denying Satterfield’s Fed. R. Civ. P. 59(e) motions in this employment discrimination case. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. See Satterfield v. Chao, No. 1:03- cv-00165-IMK (N.D. W. Va. Apr. 25 and June 13, 2006). 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 -
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