United States Court of Appeals
                             FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT
                                ________________

                                   No. 06-3139
                                ________________

Richard Anthony Kaminsky, also            *
known as Richard Anthony                  *
Kaminsky, D.O., also known as Dr.         *
Richard Anthony Kaminsky,                 *       Appeal from the United States
                                          *       District Court for the
             Appellant,                   *       Eastern District of Missouri.
                                          *
      v.                                  *            [UNPUBLISHED]
                                          *
Saint Louis University School of          *
Medicine,                                 *
                                          *
             Appellee.                    *

                                ________________

                                Submitted: May 14, 2007
                                    Filed: June 26, 2007
                                ________________

Before MURPHY, HANSEN, and COLLOTON, Circuit Judges.
                        ________________

PER CURIAM.

     Dr. Richard Kaminsky appeals the district court's1 adverse grant of summary
judgment in his Americans with Disabilities Act, 42 U.S.C. § 12112(a), and Title VII


      1
        The Honorable Catherine D. Perry, United States District Judge for the Eastern
District of Missouri.
of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, 42 U.S.C. §§ 2000e - 2000e-17, suit against Saint
Louis University School of Medicine (SLU). Upon careful de novo review, see
Ferguson v. United States, 

, 1072 (8th Cir. 2007), we find no reversible
error of fact or law. Even if Dr. Kaminsky had been able to establish a prima facie
case of discrimination, SLU proffered sufficient nondiscriminatory reasons for its
actions that Dr. Kaminsky failed to rebut as pretextual. See Freeman v. Fahey, 

, 666 (8th Cir. 2004). Accordingly, we affirm based upon the district court's
well-reasoned and thorough order. See 8th Cir. R. 47B.
                      ______________________________




                                         -2-