Case Name: Richard WILBERN, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. XEROX CORPORATION, Defendant-Appellee
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2005-04-26
Citations: 126 F. App'x 526
Docket Number: No. 03-7069
Parties: Richard WILBERN, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. XEROX CORPORATION, Defendant-Appellee.
Judges: Present: OAKES, STRAUB, Circuit Judges, and HOLWELL, District Judge.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 126
Pages: 526–527

Head Matter:
Richard WILBERN, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. XEROX CORPORATION, Defendant-Appellee.
No. 03-7069.
United States Court of Appeals, Second Circuit.
April 26, 2005.
Richard Wilbern, Rochester, NY, for Appellant, pro se.
Margaret A. Clemens, Nixon Peabody LLP, Rochester, NY, for Appellee.
Present: OAKES, STRAUB, Circuit Judges, and HOLWELL, District Judge.
The Honorable Richard J. Holwell, District Judge, United States District Court for the Southern District of New York, sitting by designation.

Opinion:
SUMMARY ORDER
AFTER ARGUMENT AND UPON DUE CONSIDERATION, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED, ADJUDGED AND DECREED that the judgment of the District Court is AFFIRMED.
Plaintiff-Appellant Richard Wilbern, pro se, appeals from a judgment entered December 13, 2002 by the United States District Court for the Western District of New York (Michael A. Telesca, Judge) granting the defendant's motion for summary judgment in its entirety and dismissing the plaintiffs claims of employment discrimination, hostile work environment, and retaliation under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, 42 U.S.C. § 2000e-5(f)(3), and the New York State Human Rights Law, N.Y. Exec. Law § 296. We assume familiarity with the facts, procedural context, and the issues on appeal.
For substantially the reasons stated by the District Court, the judgment is AFFIRMED, and the appellant's motion, filed October 12, 2004, for "Reversal of the District Court's order in its entirety" is DENIED.