Case Name: Sherry CAVIL, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. ILLINOIS TOOL WORKS, INC.; Wilsonart International, Inc.; Bill Reeb, a/k/a Bill Reed; Dennis Kopriva; Denise Motl; and John Doe, Defendants-Appellees
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2003-10-23
Citations: 78 F. App'x 955
Docket Number: No. 03-50495
Parties: Sherry CAVIL, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. ILLINOIS TOOL WORKS, INC.; Wilsonart International, Inc.; Bill Reeb, a/k/a Bill Reed; Dennis Kopriva; Denise Motl; and John Doe, Defendants-Appellees.
Judges: Before JOLLY, SMITH, and WIENER, Circuit Judges.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 78
Pages: 955–955

Head Matter:
Sherry CAVIL, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. ILLINOIS TOOL WORKS, INC.; Wilsonart International, Inc.; Bill Reeb, a/k/a Bill Reed; Dennis Kopriva; Denise Motl; and John Doe, Defendants-Appellees.
No. 03-50495.
(Summary Calendar).
United States Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit.
Oct. 23, 2003.
Gary Lynn Bledsoe, Austin, TX, for Plaintiff-Appellant.
Richard M. Kobdish, Danielle Alexis Clarkson, Fulbright & Jaworski, Dallas, TX, for Defendants-Appellees.
Before JOLLY, SMITH, and WIENER, Circuit Judges.

Opinion:
PER CURIAM.
Plaintiff-Appellant Sherry Cavil appeals the district court's order granting summary judgment for the Defendants-Appellees in her employment-related action. Cavil asserted numerous causes of action, including (1) retaliation, (2) racial discrimination, (3) defamation, (4) violation of the Americans with Disabilities Act, (5) intentional infliction of emotional distress, and (6) assault.
In our de novo review, we have considered the parties' briefs, the appendix submitted by Cavil, the record, and the district court's order and are satisfied that the district court correctly granted summary judgment. 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. Accordingly, we affirm the district court's judgment for the reasons stated by the court in its comprehensive Opinion and Order. See Cavil v. Illinois Tool Works, Inc., et al, No. W-01-CA-378 (W.D.Tex. Mar. 31, 2003).
AFFIRMED.
Pursuant to 5th Cir. R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5th Cir. R. 47.5.4.