Case Name: Michael L. LEE, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. PITTSBURGH PLATE GLASS, d/b/a PPG, Incorporated, Defendant-Appellee
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2005-12-12
Citations: 157 F. App'x 653
Docket Number: No. 05-1716
Parties: Michael L. LEE, Plaintiff—Appellant, v. PITTSBURGH PLATE GLASS, d/b/a PPG, Incorporated, Defendant—Appellee.
Judges: Before LUTTIG and TRAXLER, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 157
Pages: 653–653

Head Matter:
Michael L. LEE, Plaintiff—Appellant, v. PITTSBURGH PLATE GLASS, d/b/a PPG, Incorporated, Defendant—Appellee.
No. 05-1716.
United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.
Submitted: Nov. 21, 2005.
Decided: Dec. 12, 2005.
Michael L. Lee, Appellant Pro Se. John Raymond Mermar, Jr., Steptoe & Johnson, Clarksburg, West Virginia, for Appellee.
Before LUTTIG and TRAXLER, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge.
Affirmed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c).

Opinion:
PER CURIAM:
Michael L. Lee appeals the district court's order dismissing his civil action alleging employment discrimination, in violation of the West Virginia Human Rights Act, W. Va.Code § 5-11-1, et seq., and Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. See Lee v. Pittsburgh Plate Glass, d/b/a PPG, Inc., No. CA-04-4-5 (N.D.W.Va. May 25, 2005). 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