Document ID: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-ca4-07-01515/USCOURTS-ca4-07-01515-0/pdf.json

Parties Involved:
Robert Austin
Appellee
Edward Bower
Appellee
Carolina Healthcare System, Incorporated

Robin Connelley

Chukwuemeka F. Mbadiwe
Appellant
John W. Roberts
Appellee
Union Regional Medical Center
Appellee

Document Text:

UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 07-1515

CHUKWUEMEKA F. MBADIWE,

Plaintiff - Appellant,

versus

UNION REGIONAL MEDICAL CENTER; JOHN W.

ROBERTS; ROBERT AUSTIN; EDWARD BOWER, in their

individual and official capacities,

Defendants - Appellees,

and

CAROLINA HEALTHCARE SYSTEM, INCORPORATED;

ROBIN CONNELLEY,

Defendants.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western

District of North Carolina, at Charlotte. Graham C. Mullen, Senior

District Judge. (3:05-cv-00049)

Submitted: January 31, 2008 Decided: February 12, 2008

Before WILKINSON, TRAXLER, and SHEDD, Circuit Judges.

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Appeal: 07-1515 Doc: 34 Filed: 02/12/2008 Pg: 1 of 3
- 2 -

U. Wilfred Nwauwa, LAW OFFICES OF U. WILFRED NWAUWA, Charlotte,

North Carolina, for Appellant. Charles E. Johnson, ROBINSON,

BRADSHAW & HINSON, P.A., Charlotte, North Carolina, for Appellees.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

Appeal: 07-1515 Doc: 34 Filed: 02/12/2008 Pg: 2 of 3
- 3 -

PER CURIAM:

Chukwuemeka F. Mbadiwe, M.D., appeals the district

court’s order granting Defendants’ motion for summary judgment and

dismissing his civil rights action, filed pursuant to 42 U.S.C.

§ 1981 (2000), in which Mbadiwe asserted Defendants discriminated

against him on the basis of his race and national origin by

revoking and restricting Mbadiwe’s privileges to perform surgery at

Union Regional Medical Center. We have reviewed the record and

find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons

stated by the district court. Mbadiwe v. Union Reg’l Med. Ctr.,

No. 3:05-cv-00049 (W.D.N.C. Apr. 24, 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: 07-1515 Doc: 34 Filed: 02/12/2008 Pg: 3 of 3