Court Opinion

ID: 9956798
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2024-04-02 21:00:59.830484+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T08:17:54.203699
License: Public Domain

USCA4 Appeal: 23-1787      Doc: 16         Filed: 04/01/2024    Pg: 1 of 2

                                            UNPUBLISHED

                               UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
                                   FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

                                              No. 23-1787

        ESTHER L. CARTER,

                            Plaintiff - Appellant,

                     v.

        SENTIENT DIGITAL, INC., d/b/a Entrust Solutions,

                            Defendant - Appellee.

        Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at
        Norfolk. Elizabeth W. Hanes, District Judge. (2:21-cv-00625-EWH-DEM)

        Submitted: March 28, 2024                                         Decided: April 1, 2024

        Before KING and RUSHING, Circuit Judges, and MOTZ, Senior Circuit Judge.

        Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

        Esther L. Carter, Appellant Pro Se. Patrick M. Brogan, KAUFMAN & CANOLES, PC,
        Norfolk, Virginia, for Appellee.

        Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
USCA4 Appeal: 23-1787         Doc: 16      Filed: 04/01/2024      Pg: 2 of 2

        PER CURIAM:

               Esther L. Carter appeals the district court’s order granting Defendant’s motion to

        dismiss Carter’s amended complaint, which the court construed as seeking to raise

        disparate treatment and disparate impact discrimination claims, in violation of Title VII of

        the Civil Rights Act of 1964, 42 U.S.C. §§ 2000e to 2000e-17, and a state law fraud claim.

        Limiting our review to the issues raised in Carter’s informal brief, see 4th Cir. R. 34(b);

        see also Jackson v. Lightsey, 775 F.3d 170, 177 (4th Cir. 2014) (“The informal brief is an

        important document; under Fourth Circuit rules, our review is limited to issues preserved

        in that brief.”), we discern no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm the district court’s

        order. Carter v. Sentient Digit., Inc., No. 2:21-cv-00625-EWH-DEM (E.D. Va. July 5,

        2023). 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

                                                     2