Case Name: Sherry A. BULLOCK, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. KRAFT FOODS, INC., Defendant-Appellee
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2012-12-27
Citations: 501 F. App'x 299
Docket Number: No. 11-2404
Parties: Sherry A. BULLOCK, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. KRAFT FOODS, INC., Defendant-Appellee.
Judges: Before KING, DIAZ, and THACKER, Circuit Judges.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 501
Pages: 299–299

Head Matter:
Sherry A. BULLOCK, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. KRAFT FOODS, INC., Defendant-Appellee.
No. 11-2404.
United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.
Submitted: Nov. 20, 2012.
Decided: Dec. 27, 2012.
Michael D.J. Eisenberg, Law Office of Michael D.J. Eisenberg, Washington, D.C., for Appellant. John B. Flood, Ogletree, Deakins, Nash, Smoak & Stewart, P.C., Washington, D.C., for Appellee.
Before KING, DIAZ, and THACKER, Circuit Judges.

Opinion:
Affirmed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
PER CURIAM:
Sherry A. Bullock appeals the district court's order granting Defendant's motion for summary judgment in her suit alleging violations of the Family Medical Leave Act ("FMLA") and under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm substantially for the reasons stated by the district court. Bullock v. Kraft Foods, Inc., 2011 WL 5872898 (E.D.Va. Nov. 22, 2011). 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.
In addition, we note that Bullock's claim that she was not sufficiently paid for dates incorrectly scheduled outside of her medical restrictions in September 2007 was waived by failure to argue it to the district court. See Aziz v. Alcolac, Inc., 658 F.3d 388, 394 n. 6 (4th Cir.2011) ("In the normal course, we do not consider issues raised for the first time on appeal . "). Further, Bullock's claim of improper retroactive designation of FMLA leave fails for lack of prejudice. See Ragsdale v. Wolverine World Wide, Inc., 535 U.S. 81, 89, 122 S.Ct. 1155, 152 L.Ed.2d 167 (2002).