Case Name: Jason MOBERLY, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. UNIVERSITY OF CINCINNATI CLERMONT COLLEGE; Ann Appleton, Individually; Kimberly Ellison, Individually; James McDonough, Individually, Defendants-Appellees
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2012-05-07
Citations: 469 F. App'x 467
Docket Number: No. 10-4136
Parties: Jason MOBERLY, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. UNIVERSITY OF CINCINNATI CLERMONT COLLEGE; Ann Appleton, Individually; Kimberly Ellison, Individually; James McDonough, Individually, Defendants-Appellees.
Judges: BEFORE: MERRITT and COLE, Circuit Judges; VARLAN, District Judge.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 469
Pages: 467–467

Head Matter:
Jason MOBERLY, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. UNIVERSITY OF CINCINNATI CLERMONT COLLEGE; Ann Appleton, Individually; Kimberly Ellison, Individually; James McDonough, Individually, Defendants-Appellees.
No. 10-4136.
United States Court of Appeals, Sixth Circuit.
May 7, 2012.
BEFORE: MERRITT and COLE, Circuit Judges; VARLAN, District Judge.
The Honorable Thomas A. Varían, United States District Judge for the Eastern District of Tennessee, sitting by designation.

Opinion:
OPINION
PER CURIAM.
Plaintiff-Appellant Jason Moberly appeals the district court's grant of summary judgment in favor of Defendants-Appel-lees University of Cincinnati Clermont College, Assistant Dean of Students Ann Appleton, Director of Student Life Kimberly Ellison, and Dean James McDon-ough (collectively, "Clermont"). Moberly alleges that Clermont initially declined to hire him as assistant basketball coach in retaliation for raising complaints about racial discrimination, in violation of 42 U.S.C. § 1981, the First Amendment, and Title VI of the Civil Rights Act, 42 U.S.C. § 2000d. Despite its initial decision to offer the position to another candidate, Clermont ultimately hired Moberly.
We review the grant of a motion for summary judgment de novo and "view all evidence in the light most favorable to the non-moving party." Upshaw v. Ford Motor Co., 576 F.3d 576, 584 (6th Cir.2009). We may grant summary judgment if, upon review of the pleadings, affidavits, depositions, and answers to interrogatories, we conclude "that there is no genuine dispute as to any material fact and the movant is entitled to judgment as a matter of law." Fed.R.Civ.P. 56(a). Upon hearing oral argument and carefully reviewing the record, we conclude that the district court did not err in granting summary judgment in favor of Clermont on all claims. Accordingly, we AFFIRM for the reasons set forth in the district court opinion.