Case Name: John PAGE, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Anthony J. PRINCIPI, Secretary, Department of Veterans Affairs, Defendant-Appellee
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2004-02-27
Citations: 205 F. App'x 193
Docket Number: No. 03-20820
Parties: John PAGE, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Anthony J. PRINCIPI, Secretary, Department of Veterans Affairs, Defendant-Appellee.
Judges: Before JONES, BENAVIDES, and CLEMENT, Circuit Judges.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 205
Pages: 193–193

Head Matter:
John PAGE, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Anthony J. PRINCIPI, Secretary, Department of Veterans Affairs, Defendant-Appellee.
No. 03-20820
Summary Calendar.
United States Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit.
Feb. 27, 2004.
Gordon R. Cooper, II, Belinda Turner Saulsberry, Cooper & Cooper, Houston, TX, for Plaintiff-Appellant.
Vernon Lydell Lewis, Assistant U.S. Attorney, U.S. Attorney’s Office Southern District of Texas, Houston, TX, for Defendani>-Appellee.
Before JONES, BENAVIDES, and CLEMENT, Circuit Judges.

Opinion:
PER CURIAM:
Plaintiff John Page sued the Department of Veterans Affairs ("VA") under Title VII arguing that he was discriminated against on the basis of his age and in retaliation for engaging in protected conduct. The district court referred Page's action to Magistrate Judge Nancy K. Johnson. The VA moved for summary judgment on April 10, 2003 and Page filed a reply to the VA's motion. On July 7, the magistrate judge issued a comprehensive 19-page Memorandum and Recommendation proposing that the district court grant the VA's motion for summary judgment on all grounds. Page filed objections to the magistrate judge's recommendation and on July 23, the district court adopted the magistrate judge's recommendation in full. Page now appeals.
After having carefully reviewed the briefs, record excerpts and relevant portions of the record itself, we agree with the district court that the magistrate judge's recommendation properly addresses the legal and factual issues raised by Page. For the reasons stated by the magistrate judge and adopted by the district court, we affirm the decision of the district court granting summary judgment in favor the VA.
The judgment of the district court is 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Pursuant to 5th Cir. R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5th Cir. R. 47.5.4.