Filed: Nov. 15, 2012
Latest Update: Mar. 02, 2020
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 12-1947 KERRY LEE NIXON, Plaintiff – Appellant, v. JAMES RECTOR; OCEANA COMMISSARY STORE, Defendants - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Norfolk. Arenda Wright Allen, District Judge. (2:12-cv-00334-AWA-FBS) Submitted: November 13, 2012 Decided: November 15, 2012 Before NIEMEYER, GREGORY, and DIAZ, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Kerry Le
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 12-1947 KERRY LEE NIXON, Plaintiff – Appellant, v. JAMES RECTOR; OCEANA COMMISSARY STORE, Defendants - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Norfolk. Arenda Wright Allen, District Judge. (2:12-cv-00334-AWA-FBS) Submitted: November 13, 2012 Decided: November 15, 2012 Before NIEMEYER, GREGORY, and DIAZ, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Kerry Lee..
More
UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 12-1947
KERRY LEE NIXON,
Plaintiff – Appellant,
v.
JAMES RECTOR; OCEANA COMMISSARY STORE,
Defendants - Appellees.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern
District of Virginia, at Norfolk. Arenda Wright Allen, District
Judge. (2:12-cv-00334-AWA-FBS)
Submitted: November 13, 2012 Decided: November 15, 2012
Before NIEMEYER, GREGORY, and DIAZ, Circuit Judges.
Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Kerry Lee Nixon, Appellant Pro Se.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
PER CURIAM:
Kerry Lee Nixon appeals the district court’s order
dismissing under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e) (2006) his complaint filed
pursuant to Title VII of the Civil Rights Act. We have reviewed
the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm
for the reasons stated by the district court. Nixon v. Rector,
No. 2:12-cv-00334-AWA-FBS (E.D. Va. July 23, 2012). 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