Case Name: Betty A. CALABRACE, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. John E. POTTER, Postmaster General, Defendant-Appellee
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2007-04-30
Citations: 223 F. App'x 445
Docket Number: No. 06-5935
Parties: Betty A. CALABRACE, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. John E. POTTER, Postmaster General, Defendant-Appellee.
Judges: 
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 223
Pages: 445–445

Head Matter:
Betty A. CALABRACE, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. John E. POTTER, Postmaster General, Defendant-Appellee.
No. 06-5935.
United States Court of Appeals, Sixth Circuit.
April 30, 2007.
Before: MARTIN and MERRITT, Circuit Judges; FORESTER, Senior District Judge.
KARL S. FORESTER, Senior District Judge.
The Honorable Karl S. Forester, Senior United States District Judge for the Eastern District of Kentucky, sitting by designation.

Opinion:
The Plaintiff-Appellant, Betty A. Calabrace, filed this action against the Postmaster General of the U.S. Postal Service alleging that she was subjected to sex discrimination, sexual harassment, and retaliation for engaging in protected activity causing her to resign from her employment in violation of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, as amended, 42 U.S.C. § 2000e et seq. Upon the completion of discovery, the defendant filed his motion for summary judgment on the grounds that Calabrace's complaint failed to establish a prima facie case of sex discrimination, sexual harassment, or retaliation. The district court granted the defendant's motion for summary judgment, and judgment was entered in favor of the defendant.
Calabrace has appealed the portion of the district court's judgment in favor of the defendant on her claim for retaliation under Title VII. After carefully considering the record on appeal, the briefs of the parties, and the applicable law, and having had the benefit of oral argument, we agree with the district court's grant of summary judgment to the defendant. Because the reasoning that supports the judgment for the defendant on Calabrace's claim of retaliation has been clearly articulated by the district court in a thorough and comprehensive opinion, the issuance of a detailed written opinion by us would be unduly duplicative. Therefore, the judgment rendered by the Honorable William J. Haynes, Jr., District Judge for the Middle District of Tennessee, is AFFIRMED on the basis of the reasoning detailed in his Opinion and Order dated June 8, 2006.