Case Name: David Charles PERIO, Plaintiff-Appellant v. TERREBONNE PARISH SHERIFF'S OFFICE and Vernon Bourgeois, Defendants-Appellees
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2012-03-08
Citations: 463 F. App'x 458
Docket Number: No. 11-30524
Parties: David Charles PERIO, Plaintiff-Appellant v. TERREBONNE PARISH SHERIFF’S OFFICE and Vernon Bourgeois, Defendants-Appellees.
Judges: Before KING, BENAVIDES, and DENNIS, Circuit Judges.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 463
Pages: 458–459

Head Matter:
David Charles PERIO, Plaintiff-Appellant v. TERREBONNE PARISH SHERIFF’S OFFICE and Vernon Bourgeois, Defendants-Appellees.
No. 11-30524.
United States Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit.
March 8, 2012.
Dale Edward Williams, Law Office of Dale Edward Williams, Covington, LA, for Plaintiff-Appellant.
Richard Edward McCormack, Irwin Fritchie Urquhart & Moore, L.L.C., New Orleans, LA, William F. Dodd, Dodd Law Firm, Houma, LA, for Defendants-Appel-lees.
Before KING, BENAVIDES, and DENNIS, Circuit Judges.

Opinion:
PER CURIAM:
David Charles Perio appeals from an adverse summary judgment dismissing his Title VII race discrimination and retaliation claims and his claim under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 alleging a First Amendment retaliation claim.
After a thorough review of the record, consideration of the arguments and diseus sion presented in the briefs, and the arguments presented orally to the Court upon submission, our de novo review convinces us that the district court correctly decided the summary judgment motion in all particulars. Further writing on this appeal would only mirror the findings, analysis, and conclusions made in the district court, and would not aid the parties or the development of our caselaw. Accordingly, we affirm the judgment of the district court essentially for the reasons stated in its Order and Reasons for Summary Judgment issued April 29, 2011, 2011 WL 1654262.
AFFIRMED.
Pursuant to Fifth Circuit Rule 47.5, the Court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in Fifth Circuit Rule 47.5.4.