Document ID: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-ca4-07-01818/USCOURTS-ca4-07-01818-0/pdf.json

Parties Involved:
Walter D. Bach

Diana J. Blevins

Chine I. Chang

Manie P. Currin

Carlton M. Hadden

Francis J. Harvey
Appellee
David M. Mann

John M. Miller

Pamela Robinson
Appellant
David D. Skatrud

Regina N. Stephens

Document Text:

UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 07-1818

PAMELA ROBINSON,

Plaintiff - Appellant,

versus

FRANCIS J. HARVEY, Secretary, Department of

the Army, Successor to R. Les Brownlee,

Defendant - Appellee,

and

CHINE I. CHANG, Department of the Army; DAVID

D. SKATRUD, Department of the Army; DAVID M.

MANN, Department of the Army; WALTER D. BACH,

Department of the Army; MANIE P. CURRIN, Manie

P. Currin and Associates; General Court

Reporting Service; CARLTON M. HADDEN, U. S.

Equal Employment Opportunity Commission;

REGINA N. STEPHENS, U. S. Equal Employment

Opportunity Commission; JOHN M. MILLER,

Department of the Army; DIANA J. BLEVINS,

Department of the Defense, 

Defendants.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Middle

District of North Carolina, at Durham. James A. Beaty, Jr., Chief

District Judge. (1:05-cv-00355)

Submitted: November 15, 2007 Decided: November 20, 2007

Appeal: 07-1818 Doc: 12 Filed: 11/20/2007 Pg: 1 of 3
- 2 -

Before WILLIAMS, Chief Judge, and MOTZ and DUNCAN, Circuit Judges.

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Pamela Robinson, Appellant Pro Se. Joan Brodish Binkley, OFFICE OF

THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Greensboro, North Carolina

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

Appeal: 07-1818 Doc: 12 Filed: 11/20/2007 Pg: 2 of 3
- 3 -

PER CURIAM:

Pamela Robinson appeals the district court’s order

adopting the magistrate judge’s report and recommendation to grant

Defendant’s summary judgment motion on her claims of race and

gender discrimination, sexual and racial hostile work environment

harassment, and retaliation pursuant to Title VII of the Civil

Rights Act of 1964, as amended, 42 U.S.C. §§ 2000e to 2000e-17

(2000), and denying her second motion to amend the complaint. We

have reviewed the record and affirm for the reasons stated by the

district court. See Robinson v. Harvey, No. 1:05-cv-00355

(M.D.N.C. filed June 21, 2007; entered June 22, 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

Appeal: 07-1818 Doc: 12 Filed: 11/20/2007 Pg: 3 of 3