Case ID: f-appx_505/html/0044-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

Tanvir AMNA, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. NEW YORK DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH, State of New York, Defendants-Appellees.
    No. 11-4562-cv.
    United States Court of Appeals, Second Circuit.
    Dec. 12, 2012.
    Tanvir Amna, Springfield, VA, pro se.
    Won S. Shin, Assistant Solicitor General, for Eric T. Schneiderman, Attorney General of the State of New York, New York, N.Y. (Barbara D. Underwood, Solicitor General, Michael S. Belohlavek, Senior Counsel, Jan E. Messerschmidt, Law Student Intern, on the brief), for Defendants-Appellees.
    PRESENT: JOSÉ A. CABRANES, REENA RAGGI and SUSAN L. CARNEY, Circuit Judges.
   SUMMARY ORDER

Plaintiff-appellant Tanvir Amna (“Amna”), proceeding pro se, appeals from the District Court’s judgment granting summary judgment for defendants-appel-lees (“defendants”) in her employment discrimination action. We assume the parties’ familiarity with the underlying facts, the procedural history of the case, and the issues on appeal.

We review an order granting summary judgment de novo and “resolv[e] all ambiguities and draw[] all permissible factual inferences in favor of the party against whom summary judgment is sought.” Burg v. Gosselin, 591 F.3d 95, 97 (2d Cir.2010) (quoting Wright v. Goord, 554 F.3d 255, 266 (2d Cir.2009)); Fed.R.Civ.P. 56. Having conducted an independent and de novo review of the record in light of these principles, we affirm the District Court’s judgment substantially for the same reasons stated by Chief Judge Amon in her thorough and well-reasoned order, dated September 30, 2011.

CONCLUSION

We have considered all of Amna’s arguments and find them to be without merit. Accordingly, we AFFIRM the October 3, 2011 judgment of the District Court.