UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

STEVEN A. KING,

Plaintiff-Appellant,

v.

No. 95-2528

INTERNATIONAL BUSINESS MACHINES

CORPORATION,

Defendant-Appellee.

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Alexandria.

Claude M. Hilton, District Judge.

(CA-95-271-A)

Argued: May 9, 1996

Decided: June 19, 1996

Before MURNAGHAN and WILLIAMS, Circuit Judges, and

PHILLIPS, Senior Circuit Judge.

_________________________________________________________________

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

_________________________________________________________________

COUNSEL

ARGUED: Jack L. Gould, Fairfax, Virginia, for Appellant. Anthony

Herman, COVINGTON & BURLING, Washington, D.C., for Appellee. ON BRIEF: Eric Lasker, COVINGTON & BURLING, Washington, D.C.; Melinda Hunkins, IBM CORPORATION, Bethesda,

Maryland, for Appellee.

_________________________________________________________________
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See

Local Rule 36(c).

_________________________________________________________________

OPINION

PER CURIAM:

Appellant Steven A. King appeals a ruling of the district court

granting summary judgment to Appellee International Business

Machines Corporation (IBM) on King's various claims related to an

alleged promise of employment by IBM. Finding no error, we affirm.

King was a longtime, at-will employee of IBM's Federal Systems

Company division (FSC) in Manassas, Virginia. In 1991, King

accepted a temporary, international assignment to FSC's Merlin Program in England. Before accepting the international assignment, King

attended a briefing, during which he was informed that he would be

re-entered into IBM's domestic workforce at the conclusion of his

international assignment and that a "career manager" would be designated to assist him with the re-entry process. After he began work in

England, King signed an "international assignment letter" that

explained the terms of King's assignment to England. One portion of

the letter addressed the conclusion of King's international assignment:

International assignments are temporary in nature. The

length of your assignment is based on present business

requirements and is subject to change at the discretion of

IBM. You are expected to re-enter your home country at the

completion of your assignment or any extension.

(J.A. at 206 (emphasis added).)

While King was in England, IBM sold FSC to another company,

Loral. Pursuant to its agreement with IBM, Loral offered employment

to King and all other FSC employees under the same terms those

employees had enjoyed with IBM. Although IBM informed King that

 2
it would not employ him upon his return from England, King nevertheless declined the offer of employment with Loral.*

King then brought the instant action, alleging breach of contract,

fraud, and civil conspiracy. All of these claims are dependent on the

validity of King's assertion that IBM's oral and written representations that it "expected" to re-employ King upon the completion of his

international assignment constituted a contract that bound IBM to

offer King employment when he declined Loral's offer of employment. After a hearing on IBM's summary judgment motion, the district court concluded that IBM had not made a promise of

employment. Having had the benefit of oral argument and the parties'

briefs, and after careful consideration of the record and applicable

law, we conclude that the district court correctly determined that IBM

made no promise of employment to King. Accordingly, we affirm.

AFFIRMED

_________________________________________________________________

*Pursuant to the terms of the international assignment letter, IBM paid

to transport King, his family, and their belongings back to the United

States.

 3