White, Vail v. Allen, Keith , 186 F. App'x 685 ( 2006 )


Menu:
  •                              UNPUBLISHED ORDER
    Not to be cited per Circuit Rule 53
    United States Court of Appeals
    For the Seventh Circuit
    Chicago, Illinois 60604
    Submitted July 14, 2006*
    Decided July 18, 2006
    Before
    Hon. RICHARD D. CUDAHY, Circuit Judge
    Hon. MICHAEL S. KANNE, Circuit Judge
    Hon. DIANE S. SYKES, Circuit Judge
    No. 06-1508
    VAIL WHITE,                                  Appeal from the United States District
    Plaintiff-Appellant,                    Court for the Northern District of
    Illinois, Eastern Division
    v.
    No. 04 C 5457
    KEITH ALLEN,
    Defendant-Appellee.                     James B. Zagel,
    Judge.
    ORDER
    Vail White brought suit under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, 42
    U.S.C. § 2000e et seq., and the Age Discrimination in Employment Act, 29 U.S.C.
    § 621 et seq., alleging that Keith Allen, the manager and owner of several
    McDonald’s restaurants where White was employed, discriminated against him on
    the basis of sex and age and fired him in retaliation for complaining about the
    discrimination. The district court granted summary judgment for Allen because
    *
    After an examination of the briefs and the record, we have concluded that
    oral argument is unnecessary. Thus, the appeal is submitted on the briefs and the
    record. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2).
    No. 06-1508                                                                     Page 2
    White presented no evidence of age discrimination or retaliation and failed to
    exhaust his administrative remedies by filing a charge of sex discrimination with
    the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission.
    On appeal White does not identify any error made by the district court, nor
    does he develop an argument with citations to legal authority or the record. See
    Fed. R. App. P. 28(a)(9)(A); Anderson v. Hardman, 
    241 F.3d 544
    , 545 (7th Cir.
    2001). The argument section of his brief consists of two sentences requesting
    simply that the district court’s judgment be overturned. Although we construe the
    filings of pro se litigants liberally, White still must offer “more than a generalized
    assertion of error.” 
    Anderson, 241 F.3d at 545
    .
    Accordingly this appeal is DISMISSED.
    

Document Info

Docket Number: 06-1508

Citation Numbers: 186 F. App'x 685

Judges: Hon, Cudahy, Kanne, Sykes

Filed Date: 7/18/2006

Precedential Status: Non-Precedential

Modified Date: 11/5/2024