Case ID: f-appx_451/html/0438-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "PER CURIAM:\n    ", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

Tyres Frai’ Aunt AUTREY, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. HUNTINGTON INGALLS, INCORPORATED, Defendant-Appellee.
    No. 11-60448
    Summary Calendar.
    United States Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit.
    Nov. 29, 2011.
    Tyres F. Autrey, Pascagoula, MS, pro se.
    Brooks Eason, Adam Hayes Gates, Esq., Baker, Donelson, Bearman, Caldwell & Berkowitz, P.C., Jackson, MS, for Defendant-Appellee.
    Before REAVLEY, SMITH, and PRADO, Circuit Judges.
   PER CURIAM:

Tyres Autrey appeals, pro se, a summary judgment on his pro se complaint of race and sex discrimination, retaliation, defamation, and slander. In the district court, he conceded some of the claims.

The district court explained its ruling in a thorough and convincing Memorandum Opinion and Order. The court noted that there was no evidence of direct discrimination and that under the burden-shifting framework, the employer had proffered a legitimate reason for choosing another person for the position that Autrey sought. Specifically, the company relied on the fact that the other person already had experience in the warehouse and had a bachelor’s degree. Autrey’s other arguments asserted on appeal are similarly without merit.

The summary judgment is AFFIRMED, essentially for the reasons stated by the district court. 
      
       Pursuant to 5th Cir. R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5th Cir. R. 47.5.4.