Case ID: f-appx_671/html/0873-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "PER CURIAM:", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

Adrienne WALKER-PITTMAN, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. MARYLAND DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION; Maryland Transit Administration, Defendants-Appellees.
    No. 15-1226
    United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.
    Submitted: November 30, 2016
    Decided: December 21, 2016
    
      John H. Morris, Jr., Baltimore, Maryland, for Appellant. Brian E. Frosh, Attorney General of Maryland, Jennifer L. Katz, Eric S. Hartwig, Assistant Attorneys General, Baltimore, Maryland, for Appel-lees.
    Before GREGORY, Chief Judge, and KING and AGEE, Circuit Judges.
   Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

PER CURIAM:

Adrienne Walker-Pittman appeals the district court’s order granting the Maryland Department of Transportation’s and the Maryland Transportation Administration’s motion to dismiss Walker-Pittman’s retaliation and race and gender discrimination claims, brought pursuant to Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, as amended, 42 U.S.C.A. §§ 2000e to 2000e-17 (West 2008 & Supp. 2016); retaliation and age discrimination claims, brought pursuant to the Age Discrimination in Employment Act of 1967, as amended, 29 U.S.C.A. §§ 621 to 634 (West 2008 & Supp. 2016); retaliation and disability discrimination claims, brought pursuant to the Americans with Disabilities Act, 42 U.S.C. §§ 12101-12213 (2012), and the Rehabilitation Act of 1973, as amended, 29 U.S.C.A. §§ 701 to 7961 (West 2008 & Supp. 2016); and unlawful employment practices claims, brought pursuant to the Maryland Fair Employment Practices Act, Md. Code Ann., State Gov’t § 20-606(a)(1)(i) (West 2014). We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm the district court’s order. See Walker-Pittman v. Md. Dep’t of Transp., No. 1:14-cv-00202-CCB, 2015 WL 419806 (D. Md. Jan. 29, 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