Case Name: Elsibeth Brandee MCCOY, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Steve CANTERBURY, Administrative Director for Supreme Court of Appeals of West Virginia, Defendant-Appellee, and Supreme Court of Appeals of West Virginia; Cabell County Courthouse; Barbra Wills, Courthouse Administrator, Defendants
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2011-05-05
Citations: 428 F. App'x 247
Docket Number: No. 11-1017
Parties: Elsibeth Brandee MCCOY, Plaintiff—Appellant, v. Steve CANTERBURY, Administrative Director for Supreme Court of Appeals of West Virginia, Defendant—Appellee, and Supreme Court of Appeals of West Virginia; Cabell County Courthouse; Barbra Wills, Courthouse Administrator, Defendants.
Judges: Before WILKINSON, DAVIS, and KEENAN, Circuit Judges.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 428
Pages: 247–247

Head Matter:
Elsibeth Brandee MCCOY, Plaintiff—Appellant, v. Steve CANTERBURY, Administrative Director for Supreme Court of Appeals of West Virginia, Defendant—Appellee, and Supreme Court of Appeals of West Virginia; Cabell County Courthouse; Barbra Wills, Courthouse Administrator, Defendants.
No. 11-1017.
United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.
Submitted: May 2, 2011.
Decided: May 5, 2011.
Elsibeth Brandee McCoy, Appellant Pro Se. John Michael Hedges, Stephanie Shepherd, Byrne, Hedges & Lyons, Morgantown, West Virginia, for Appellee.
Before WILKINSON, DAVIS, and KEENAN, Circuit Judges.

Opinion:
Affirmed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
PER CURIAM:
Elsibeth Brandee McCoy appeals the district court's order dismissing her action filed under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, as amended, 42 U.S.C.A. § 2000e to 2000e-17 (West 2003 & Supp. 2010). We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm substantially for the reasons stated by the district court. McCoy v. Canterbury, No. 3:10-cv-00368, 2010 WL 5343298 (S.D. W.Va. Dec. 20 & 21, 2010). 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.