Case ID: f-appx_228/html/0365-01.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

Raj BHARADWAJA, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Martin O’MALLEY, Individually and as The Mayor of Baltimore City; City of Baltimore; Baltimore City Housing Authority; Department of Housing and Community Development; Dorreya Elmenshawy, Individually and as officer/employee of Baltimore City Department; John Doe, 1-5; Jane Doe, 1-5, Defendants-Appellees.
    No. 06-2161.
    United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.
    Submitted: May 2, 2007.
    Decided: June 1, 2007.
    Michael P. Coyle, The Law Offices of Michael P. Coyle, Columbia, Maryland, for Appellant. Karen Stakem Hornig, Chief Legal Counsel, George A. Nilson, City Solicitor, William R. Phelan, Jr., Principal Counsel, Baltimore, Maryland, for Appellees.
    Before TRAXLER, KING, and SHEDD, Circuit Judges.
    Affirmed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.
    Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
   PER CURIAM:

Raj Bharadwaja brought this action against Martin O’Malley, individually and as the Mayor of Baltimore City, the City of Baltimore, and several other governmental and individual defendants, alleging claims of wrongful discharge, defamation, civil conspiracy and a claim of retaliation in violation of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, as amended, 42 U.S.C. §§ 2000e to 2000e-17 (2000). We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. See Bharadwaja v. O'Malley, No. l:04-cv03826-RDB (D. Md. filed Sept. 27, 2006; entered Sept. 28, 2006). 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.