Case Name: Eric D. ECHOLS, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. HOME DEPOT U.S.A., INC., Defendant-Appellee
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2006-11-30
Citations: 208 F. App'x 747
Docket Number: No. 06-12681
Parties: Eric D. ECHOLS, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. HOME DEPOT U.S.A., INC., Defendant-Appellee.
Judges: Before BLACK, MARCUS and WILSON, Circuit Judges.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 208
Pages: 747–748

Head Matter:
This case was not selected for publication in the Federal Reporter [DO NOT PUBLISH]
Eric D. ECHOLS, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. HOME DEPOT U.S.A., INC., Defendant-Appellee.
No. 06-12681
Non-Argument Calendar.
United States Court of Appeals, Eleventh Circuit.
Nov. 30, 2006.
Bradley Thomas Adler, Benton J. Mathis, Jr., Mary Anne Aekourey, Freeman Mathis & Gary, LLP, Atlanta, GA, for Plaintiff-Appellant.
Tracey Barbaree, R. Lawrence Ashe, Jr., Sandra Kim, Ashe, Rafuse & Hill, LLP, AtLanta, GA, for D efendant-App ellee.
Before BLACK, MARCUS and WILSON, Circuit Judges.

Opinion:
PER CURIAM:
Eric Echols, an African-American, appeals the district court's grant of summary judgment in favor of Home Depot on his employment discrimination lawsuit, filed pursuant to Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, 42 U.S.C. § 2000e-2(a)(2), and 42 U.S.C. § 1981. Echols alleged in his complaint that Home Depot discriminated against him by failing to hire him for an administrative position with the company. On appeal, he claims that the district court erred by finding that the reasons given for. his non-selection were legitimate and not pretextual.
Upon review of the briefs and the record, we find that the district court correctly concluded that Echols failed to raise a genuine issue of fact as to whether Home Depot's proffered reasons for failing to hire him were pretextual. The record reflects that Marvin Ellison, an African-American and a Home Depot supervisor, initially offered the job to another African-American who declined it. He then selected Bret Graddy, a white male, because of his superior experience and qualifications. Ellison says that Echols was not selected because of his lack of a college degree, lack of strategic planning experience, and a history of job hopping. We find nothing in the record, other than Echols's own unsupported claims, to support a conclusion that these reasons were a pretext for discrimination or that a racial motivation otherwise affected Ellison's decision-making process.
Accordingly, we affirm.
AFFIRMED.