Ringo v. Mineta , 51 F. App'x 451 ( 2002 )

UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 02-1708
KENNETH RINGO,
Plaintiff - Appellant,
versus
NORMAN Y. MINETA, Secretary, United States
Department of Transportation (Federal Aviation
Administration), in his official capacity and
his officer, agents and successors,
Defendant - Appellee.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern
District of Virginia, at Alexandria. Leonie M. Brinkema, District
Judge. (CA-01-1243-A)
Submitted: November 20, 2002 Decided: December 3, 2002
Before NIEMEYER, WILLIAMS, and KING, Circuit Judges.
Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Kenneth Ringo, Appellant Pro Se. Rachel Celia Ballow, OFFICE OF
THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Alexandria, Virginia, for Appellee.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
See Local Rule 36(c).
PER CURIAM:
Kenneth Ringo appeals the district court’s order granting
summary judgment in favor of Appellee denying his claims under
Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, as amended, 42 U.S.C.A.
§§ 2000e to 2000e-17 (West 1994 & Supp. 2002). We affirm.
We review an award of summary judgment de novo. Higgins v.
E.I. DuPont de Nemours & Co., 863 F.2d 1162, 1167 (4th Cir. 1988).
Summary judgment is appropriate only if there are no genuine issues
of material fact and the moving party is entitled to judgment as a
matter of law. Fed. R. Civ. P. 56(c); Celotex Corp. v. Catrett,
477 U.S. 317, 322-23 (1986). The evidence is viewed in the light
most favorable to the non-moving party. Anderson v. Liberty Lobby,
Inc., 477 U.S. 242, 255 (1986).
With these standards in mind, we affirm on the reasoning of
the district court, stated from the bench following a full hearing.
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