Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-ca8-04-01165/USCOURTS-ca8-04-01165-0/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 442
Nature of Suit: Civil Rights Employment
Cause of Action: 

---

United States Court of Appeals

FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT

___________

No. 04-1165

___________

Leonard C. Lee, *

*

Appellant, *

* Appeal from the United States

v. * District Court for the Eastern

* District of Arkansas.

Tommy G. Thompson, Secretary, *

United States Department of Health * [UNPUBLISHED]

and Human Services, *

*

Appellee, *

*

Vicky Ross-Barsch, Individually and *

in her official capacity as Assistant *

Deputy Director, NCTR; Victor G. *

Attwood, Individually and in his *

official capacity as Deputy Director, *

NCTR; Mary Ann Hutchinson, *

Individually and in her official capacity *

as Personnel Director, NCTR; Dick *

King, Individually and in his official *

capacity as Personnel Specialist, *

NCTR; Kimberly Carter, Individually *

and in her official capacity as Director *

Division of Personnel Operations, *

ORA; George Calvert, Individually *

and in his official capacity as Director, *

Classification Services, FDA, *

*

Defendants. *

___________

Appellate Case: 04-1165 Page: 1 Date Filed: 01/24/2005 Entry ID: 1858419 
1

The Honorable James M. Moody, United States District Judge for the Eastern

District of Arkansas.

-2-

Submitted: December 24, 2004

Filed: January 24, 2005

___________

Before BYE, MELLOY, and COLLOTON, Circuit Judges.

___________

PER CURIAM.

Leonard Lee appeals the district court’s1

 adverse judgment after a bench trial

in his Title VII action against the Secretary of the Department of Health and Human

Services. After carefully reviewing the record, we find no clear error in the district

court’s findings that Lee did not prove race discrimination, retaliation, or harassment.

See Tadlock v. Powell, 291 F.3d 541, 546 (8th Cir. 2002) (standard of review). We

also agree with the court that Lee did not exhaust his administrative remedies on his

claim that supervisors discriminated and retaliated against him by accusing him of

fraud in a worker’s compensation case. See Burkett v. Glickman, 327 F.3d 658, 660

(8th Cir. 2003). 

Accordingly, we affirm. See 8th Cir. R. 47B.

______________________________

Appellate Case: 04-1165 Page: 2 Date Filed: 01/24/2005 Entry ID: 1858419