Filed: Dec. 22, 2014
Latest Update: Mar. 02, 2020
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 14-1829 ANTHONY DWAYNE HAMMONDS, Plaintiff - Appellant, v. BO’S FOOD STORE, Defendant - Appellee. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of North Carolina, at Wilmington. Louise W. Flanagan, District Judge. (7:13-cv-00066-FL) Submitted: December 18, 2014 Decided: December 22, 2014 Before SHEDD, WYNN, and THACKER, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Anthony Dwayne Hammonds,
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 14-1829 ANTHONY DWAYNE HAMMONDS, Plaintiff - Appellant, v. BO’S FOOD STORE, Defendant - Appellee. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of North Carolina, at Wilmington. Louise W. Flanagan, District Judge. (7:13-cv-00066-FL) Submitted: December 18, 2014 Decided: December 22, 2014 Before SHEDD, WYNN, and THACKER, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Anthony Dwayne Hammonds, ..
More
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 14-1829 ANTHONY DWAYNE HAMMONDS, Plaintiff - Appellant, v. BO’S FOOD STORE, Defendant - Appellee. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of North Carolina, at Wilmington. Louise W. Flanagan, District Judge. (7:13-cv-00066-FL) Submitted: December 18, 2014 Decided: December 22, 2014 Before SHEDD, WYNN, and THACKER, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Anthony Dwayne Hammonds, Appellant Pro Se. Kimberly Joyce Lehman, OGLETREE DEAKINS NASH SMOAK & STEWART, PC, Raleigh, North Carolina, for Appellee. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. PER CURIAM: Anthony Dwayne Hammonds appeals the district court’s order adopting the magistrate judge’s recommendation and denying relief in 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. Hammonds v. Bo’s Food Store, No. 7:13-cv-00066-FL (E.D.N.C. July 29, 2014). We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before this court and argument would not aid the decisional process. AFFIRMED 2
