Case Name: Anthony GRONOWICZ, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. BRONX COMMUNITY COLLEGE, Defendant-Appellee
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2009-09-14
Citations: 331 F. App'x 889
Docket Number: No. 07-5117-cv
Parties: Anthony GRONOWICZ, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. BRONX COMMUNITY COLLEGE, Defendant-Appellee.
Judges: Present GUIDO CALABRESI, JOSE A. CABRANES, and PETER W. HALL, Circuit Judges.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 331
Pages: 889–890

Head Matter:
Anthony GRONOWICZ, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. BRONX COMMUNITY COLLEGE, Defendant-Appellee.
No. 07-5117-cv.
United States Court of Appeals, Second Circuit.
Sept. 14, 2009.
Anthony Gronowicz, pro se.
Susan Paulson, Assistant Corporation Counsel (Michael A. Cardozo, Corporation Counsel, on the brief) The City of New York Law Department, New York, NY, for Appellee.
Present GUIDO CALABRESI, JOSE A. CABRANES, and PETER W. HALL, Circuit Judges.

Opinion:
SUMMARY ORDER
Plaintiff-appellant Anthony Gronowicz, proceeding pro se, appeals from an October 9, 2007 judgment of the District Court granting the motion for summary judgment of defendant-appellee Bronx Community College and dismissing plaintiffs com plaint with prejudice. Before the District Court, plaintiff, through an attorney, alleged that defendant improperly discriminated against him in violation of the Age Discrimination in Employment Act of 1967, 29 U.S.C. § 621 et seq., and the New York State Human Rights Law, N.Y. Exec. Law § 290 et aeq., when it decided not to hire him for a full-time tenure-track position. On appeal, plaintiff contends that the District Court erred in holding that he had failed to establish a dispute of material fact as to whether defendant discriminated against him in failing to hire him. We assume the parties' familiarity with the facts and procedural history of the case.
We agree with the District Court that plaintiff failed to introduce evidence suggesting that the non-discriminatory reasons put forth by defendant for not hiring him were pretext for unlawful discrimination. Substantially for the reasons stated by the Distinct Court in its careful and thoughtful Memorandum Order of October 9, 2007, nee Gronowicz v. Bronx Cmty. Coll., 2007 WL 2948339 (S.D.N.Y. Oct. 9, 2007), the judgment of the District Court is AFFIRMED.