Case Name: Rosemary L. JIMENEZ, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Michael J. ASTRUE, Commissioner of Social Security Administration; Neil Anthony Gordon McPhie, United States Merit System Protection Board; Linda M. Springer, United States Office of Personnel Management, Defendants-Appellees
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2008-08-04
Citations: 286 F. App'x 16
Docket Number: No. 08-1182
Parties: Rosemary L. JIMENEZ, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Michael J. ASTRUE, Commissioner of Social Security Administration; Neil Anthony Gordon McPhie, United States Merit System Protection Board; Linda M. Springer, United States Office of Personnel Management, Defendants-Appellees.
Judges: 
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 286
Pages: 16–17

Head Matter:
Rosemary L. JIMENEZ, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Michael J. ASTRUE, Commissioner of Social Security Administration; Neil Anthony Gordon McPhie, United States Merit System Protection Board; Linda M. Springer, United States Office of Personnel Management, Defendants-Appellees.
No. 08-1182.
United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.
Submitted: July 31, 2008.
Decided: Aug. 4, 2008.
Rosemary L. Jimenez, Appellant Pro Se. Alex Samuel Gordon, Office of the United States Attorney, Allen F. Loucks, Assistant United States Attorney, Jennifer Wright Schick, Assistant United States Attorney, Baltimore, Maryland, for Appel-lees.
Before NIEMEYER and TRAXLER, Circuit Judges.
Affirmed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
The opinion is filed by a quorum pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 46(d).

Opinion:
PER CURIAM:
Rosemary L. Jimenez appeals the district court's order granting defendants' motion for summary judgment in this employment discrimination action. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. Jimenez v. Astrue, No. l:06-cv-03228-JFM, 2007 WL 4287580 (D.Md, Nov. 20, 2007). 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.