Case ID: f-appx_538/html/0263-01.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

Thomas B. KULISH, On behalf of himself and on behalf of all other similarly situated employees, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. RITE AID CORPORATION and Eckerd Corporation, d/b/a Rite Aid; Rite Aid of Maryland, Inc. d/b/a Rite Aid,, Defendants-Appellees.
    No. 13-1044.
    United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.
    Submitted: June 7, 2013.
    Decided: Aug. 16, 2013.
    Martin A. Shellist, Daryl J. Sinkule, Shellist Lazarz Slobin LLP, Houston, Texas; Judd G. Millman, Luchansky Law, Towson, Maryland, for Appellant. Suz-zanne W. Decker, Michael B. Howard, Miles & Stockbridge, P.C., Baltimore, Maryland, for Appellees.
    Before TRAXLER, Chief Judge, and GREGORY and DIAZ, Circuit Judges.
    Affirmed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.
    Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
   PER CURIAM:

Thomas Kulish, along with two other individuals who opted-in to this collective action, appeals the district court’s order granting defendants summary judgment on Kulish’s Second Amended Class Action Complaint alleging violations of the Fair Labor Standards Act, 29 U.S.C. § 201 et seq., and the Maryland Wage and Hour Law, Md. Code, Lab. & Empl. § 3^101 et seq.

We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons ably stated by the district court. Kulish v. Rite Aid Corp., No. ELH-11-3178, 2012 WL 6532414 (D.Md. Dec. 13, 2012). 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.