Case Name: Michael Edward KENNEDY, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY; Michelle V. Mitchell, sued in her individual and official capacities; John McHugh, Secretary of the Army, sued in his individual and official capacities, Defendants-Appellees
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2014-02-19
Citations: 554 F. App'x 248
Docket Number: No. 13-2262
Parties: Michael Edward KENNEDY, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY; Michelle V. Mitchell, sued in her individual and official capacities; John McHugh, Secretary of the Army, sued in his individual and official capacities, Defendants-Appellees.
Judges: Before MOTZ and THACKER, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 554
Pages: 248–249

Head Matter:
Michael Edward KENNEDY, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY; Michelle V. Mitchell, sued in her individual and official capacities; John McHugh, Secretary of the Army, sued in his individual and official capacities, Defendants-Appellees.
No. 13-2262.
United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.
Submitted: Feb. 10, 2014.
Decided: Feb. 19, 2014.
Michael Edward Kennedy, Appellant Pro Se. Larry David Adams, Assistant United States Attorney, Baltimore, Maryland, for Appellees.
Before MOTZ and THACKER, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge.

Opinion:
Affirmed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
PER CURIAM:
Michael Edward Kennedy appeals the district court's order granting Defendants' motion to dismiss his complaint alleging Defendants violated Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, as amended, 42 U.S.C.A. § 2000e to 2000e-17 (West 2012), the Administrative Procedures Act, and his right to due process under the Fifth and Fourteenth Amendments. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm the district court's order. Kennedy v. Department of the Army, No. 1:13-cv-00390-CCB, 2013 WL 4541404 (D.Md. filed Aug. 23, 2013; entered Aug. 26, 2013). We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before this court and argument would not aid the decisional process.
AFFIRMED.