Case ID: f-appx_475/html/0639-01.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

Donna LUNDAY, Appellant, v. Ken SALAZAR, Secretary, United States Department of Interior, or his predecessor-in-office; and United States Department of Interior, Appellees.
    No. 12-1240.
    United States Court of Appeals, Eighth Circuit.
    Submitted: July 5, 2012.
    Filed: July 12, 2012.
    Donna Lunday, Dunseith, ND, pro se.
    Cameron Hayden, U.S. Attorney’s Office, Bismarck, ND, for Appellees.
    Before MURPHY, ARNOLD, and SHEPHERD, Circuit Judges.
   PER CURIAM.

In this action claiming employment-related discrimination and retaliation, Donna Lunday appeals the district court’s adverse grant of summary judgment. Appel-lees suggest that the appeal should be dismissed for lack of jurisdiction, based upon an argument that the district court lacked subject matter jurisdiction. Appel-lees alternatively argue that summary judgment was correctly granted.

We note that appellees’ argument regarding the district court’s subject matter jurisdiction does not implicate our appellate jurisdiction. In any event, we conclude that jurisdiction was proper in the district court, see Warren v. Dep’t of Army, 867 F.2d 1156, 1159 (8th Cir.1989), and, upon careful de novo review, see Torgerson v. City of Rochester, 643 F.3d 1031, 1042 (8th Cir.) (en banc), cert. denied, — U.S. -, 132 S.Ct. 513, 181 L.Ed.2d 349 (2011), we further conclude — for the reasons stated by the district court — that summary judgment was appropriately granted.

Accordingly, we affirm. See 8th Cir. R. 47B. 
      
      . The Honorable Daniel L. Hovland, United States District Judge for the District of North Dakota.