Case ID: f-appx_271/html/0312-01.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

Faye Robin TOULAN, Plaintiff—Appellant, v. DAP, INCORPORATED, Defendant-Appellee.
    No. 07-1086.
    United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.
    Submitted: Jan. 28, 2008.
    Decided: March 26, 2008.
    Michael J. Snider, Ari Taragin, Jason I. Weisbrot, Jacob Statman, Snider & Associates, LLC, Baltimore, Maryland, for Appellant. Douglas M. Topolski, Elena D. Marcuss, McGuirewoods, LLP, Baltimore, Maryland, for Appellee.
    Before NIEMEYER, MICHAEL, and GREGORY, Circuit Judges.
    Affirmed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.
    Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
   PER CURIAM:

Faye Robin Toulan appeals the district court’s order granting DAP, Incorporated’s (“DAP”) summary judgment motion on her retaliation and gender and national origin (American) discrimination claims, brought pursuant to Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, as amended, 42 U.S.C. §§ 2000e to 2000e-17 (2000), and her salary discrimination claim, brought pursuant to the Equal Pay Act, 29 U.S.C. § 206(d) (2000). We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. See Toulan v. DAP, Inc., No. l:05-cv-02254-CCB, 2007 WL 172522 (D.Md. Jan. 17, 2007). 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. 
      
       We deny Toulan’s Fed. R.App. P. 28(j) request to defer action on her appeal pending the Supreme Court’s consideration of CBOCS West, Inc. v. Humphries, - U.S. -, 128 S.Ct. 30, 168 L.Ed.2d 807 (2007), and deny DAP’s outstanding request for costs associated with the filing of a supplemental appendix.