Case Name: Michael C. BUTTS, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Michael B. DONLEY, Acting Secretary, Department of the Air Force, Defendant-Appellee
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2011-02-16
Citations: 411 F. App'x 581
Docket Number: No. 09-2236
Parties: Michael C. BUTTS, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Michael B. DONLEY, Acting Secretary, Department of the Air Force, Defendant-Appellee.
Judges: Before WILKINSON and DAVIS, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 411
Pages: 581–581

Head Matter:
Michael C. BUTTS, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Michael B. DONLEY, Acting Secretary, Department of the Air Force, Defendant-Appellee.
No. 09-2236.
United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.
Submitted: Feb. 10, 2011.
Decided: Feb. 16, 2011.
Daniel K. Gebhardt, Charles W. Day, Jr., Gebhardt & Associates, LLP, Washington, D.C., for Appellant. Rod J. Rosenstein, United States Attorney, Melanie L. Glickson, Assistant United States Attorney, Baltimore, Maryland, for Appellee.
Before WILKINSON and DAVIS, 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Affirmed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.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 C. Butts appeals the district court's order granting Defendant's motion for summary judgment on his race and age discrimination claims, brought pursuant to Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, as amended, 42 U.S.C.A. § 2000e to 2000e-17 (West 2003 & Supp.2010), and the Age Discrimination in Employment Act of 1967, as amended, 29 U.S.C.A. § 621 to 634 (West 2008 & Supp.2010), and denying his Fed.R.Civ.P. 56(f) motion for discovery. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm the district court's order. See Butts v. Donley, No. 8:08-cv-01963-AW, 2009 WL 2778273 (D.Md. Aug. 28, 2009). 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.