Case ID: f-appx_709/html/0205-01.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

Harold BOYD, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Miller PIPELINE, Defendant-Appellee, and Candice S. Walker, Ogletree Deakins, Defendant.
    No. 17-1885
    United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.
    Submitted: January 18, 2018
    Decided: January 22, 2018
    
      Harold Boyd, Appellant Pro Se, Homer Bernard Tisdale, III, OGLETREE DEA-KINS NASH SMOAK & STEWART, PC, Charlotte, North Carolina, for Appellee.
    Before GREGORY, Chief Judge, and SHEDD and HARRIS, Circuit Judges.
   Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

PER CURIAM:

Harold Boyd appeals the district court’s order granting Miller Pipeline’s dispositive motions and dismissing for lack of subject matter jurisdiction Boyd’s employment discrimination suit, brought pursuant to Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, as amended, 42 U.S.C. §§ 2000e to 2000e-17 (2012). We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. Boyd v. Miller Pipeline, No. 3:16-cv-00278-FDW-DSC (W.D.N.C. July 13, 2017). 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