Filed: Dec. 21, 2015
Latest Update: Mar. 02, 2020
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 15-1809 YVETTE ISKANDER, Plaintiff - Appellant, v. DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY; RAYMOND MABUS, Secretary, Defendants - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of North Carolina, at Wilmington. James C. Dever, III, Chief District Judge. (7:12-cv-00270-D) Submitted: December 11, 2015 Decided: December 21, 2015 Before DUNCAN, AGEE, and WYNN, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam op
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 15-1809 YVETTE ISKANDER, Plaintiff - Appellant, v. DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY; RAYMOND MABUS, Secretary, Defendants - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of North Carolina, at Wilmington. James C. Dever, III, Chief District Judge. (7:12-cv-00270-D) Submitted: December 11, 2015 Decided: December 21, 2015 Before DUNCAN, AGEE, and WYNN, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opi..
More
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 15-1809 YVETTE ISKANDER, Plaintiff - Appellant, v. DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY; RAYMOND MABUS, Secretary, Defendants - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of North Carolina, at Wilmington. James C. Dever, III, Chief District Judge. (7:12-cv-00270-D) Submitted: December 11, 2015 Decided: December 21, 2015 Before DUNCAN, AGEE, and WYNN, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Yvette Iskander, Appellant Pro Se. Rudolf A. Renfer, Jr., Assistant United States Attorney, Michael Gordon James, OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Raleigh, North Carolina, for Appellees. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. PER CURIAM: Yvette Iskander appeals the district court’s order granting summary judgment in favor of her former employer in her employment discrimination action. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. Iskander v. Dep’t of the Navy, No. 7:12-cv-00270-D (E.D.N.C. July 7, 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
