Filed: Mar. 19, 2010
Latest Update: Mar. 02, 2020
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 09-2100 BORIS SHULMAN, Plaintiff – Appellant, v. BLUE CROSS & BLUE SHIELD OF SOUTH CAROLINA, Defendant – Appellee, and SOUTH CAROLINA HUMAN AFFAIRS COMMISSION, Defendant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina, at Columbia. Cameron McGowan Currie, District Judge. (3:07-cv-02967-CMC) Submitted: March 16, 2010 Decided: March 19, 2010 Before NIEMEYER, MOTZ, and DAVIS, Circuit Judges. Affir
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 09-2100 BORIS SHULMAN, Plaintiff – Appellant, v. BLUE CROSS & BLUE SHIELD OF SOUTH CAROLINA, Defendant – Appellee, and SOUTH CAROLINA HUMAN AFFAIRS COMMISSION, Defendant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina, at Columbia. Cameron McGowan Currie, District Judge. (3:07-cv-02967-CMC) Submitted: March 16, 2010 Decided: March 19, 2010 Before NIEMEYER, MOTZ, and DAVIS, Circuit Judges. Affirm..
More
UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 09-2100
BORIS SHULMAN,
Plaintiff – Appellant,
v.
BLUE CROSS & BLUE SHIELD OF SOUTH CAROLINA,
Defendant – Appellee,
and
SOUTH CAROLINA HUMAN AFFAIRS COMMISSION,
Defendant.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of
South Carolina, at Columbia. Cameron McGowan Currie, District
Judge. (3:07-cv-02967-CMC)
Submitted: March 16, 2010 Decided: March 19, 2010
Before NIEMEYER, MOTZ, and DAVIS, Circuit Judges.
Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Boris Shulman, Appellant Pro Se. Kathryn Thomas, GIGNILLIAT,
SAVITZ & BETTIS, Columbia, South Carolina, for Appellant.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
PER CURIAM:
Boris Shulman appeals the district court’s order
accepting the magistrate judge’s recommendation to grant
Defendant’s motion for summary judgment on his retaliation and
race and national origin discrimination claims, in violation of
Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, as amended, 42 U.S.C.
§§ 2000e to 2000e-17 (2006). We have reviewed the record and
find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm the district
court’s order. See Shulman v. Blue Cross & Blue Shield of S.C.,
No. 3:07-cv-02967-CMC (D.S.C. Sept. 2, 2009). 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