Filed: Nov. 25, 2015
Latest Update: Mar. 02, 2020
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 15-1593 DAVOUD ALLEN EGHBALI, Plaintiff - Appellant, v. DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY, at the Savannah River National Lab, Defendant - Appellee. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina, at Aiken. J. Michelle Childs, District Judge. (1:12-cv-03460-JMC) Submitted: October 15, 2015 Decided: November 25, 2015 Before GREGORY, DIAZ, and FLOYD, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 15-1593 DAVOUD ALLEN EGHBALI, Plaintiff - Appellant, v. DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY, at the Savannah River National Lab, Defendant - Appellee. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina, at Aiken. J. Michelle Childs, District Judge. (1:12-cv-03460-JMC) Submitted: October 15, 2015 Decided: November 25, 2015 Before GREGORY, DIAZ, and FLOYD, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. ..
More
UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 15-1593
DAVOUD ALLEN EGHBALI,
Plaintiff - Appellant,
v.
DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY, at the Savannah River National Lab,
Defendant - Appellee.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of
South Carolina, at Aiken. J. Michelle Childs, District Judge.
(1:12-cv-03460-JMC)
Submitted: October 15, 2015 Decided: November 25, 2015
Before GREGORY, DIAZ, and FLOYD, Circuit Judges.
Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Davoud Allen Eghbali, Appellant Pro Se. Terri Hearn Bailey,
Assistant United States Attorney, Columbia, South Carolina, for
Appellee.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
PER CURIAM:
Davoud Allen Eghbali appeals the district court’s orders
accepting the recommendation of the magistrate judge and
dismissing his employment discrimination complaint and denying
his motion under Fed. R. Civ. P. 59(e). We have reviewed the
record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm the
district court’s orders. See Butler v. Drive Auto. Indus. of
Am., Inc.,
793 F.3d 404 (4th Cir. 2015). 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