Court Opinion

ID: 9960715
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2024-04-16 21:00:39.686854+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T08:19:48.098600
License: Public Domain

USCA4 Appeal: 23-1781      Doc: 24         Filed: 04/15/2024    Pg: 1 of 2

                                            UNPUBLISHED

                               UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
                                   FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

                                              No. 23-1781

        WILBERT J. ALEXANDER, II, a/k/a Wilbert Alexander,

                            Plaintiff - Appellant,

                     v.

        SOUTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION, Human
        Resources manager; MICHAEL GUFFEE, Controller; KACE SMITH, CFO;
        CYNTHIA JOHNSON, Employee Relations staff,

                            Defendants - Appellees.

        Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina, at
        Columbia. Terry L. Wooten, Senior District Judge. (3:20-cv-04480-TLW)

        Submitted: April 11, 2024                                         Decided: April 15, 2024

        Before AGEE and QUATTLEBAUM, Circuit Judges, and FLOYD, Senior Circuit Judge.

        Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

        Wilbert J. Alexander, II, Appellant Pro Se.

        Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
USCA4 Appeal: 23-1781      Doc: 24         Filed: 04/15/2024      Pg: 2 of 2

        PER CURIAM:

               Wilbert J. Alexander, II, appeals the district court’s orders granting Defendants’

        motions to dismiss and for summary judgment in Alexander’s civil action raising several

        federal and state law claims, including claims for discrimination, harassment, and

        retaliation, in violation of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, 42 U.S.C. §§ 2000e to

        2000e-17. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we

        affirm the district court’s judgment. Alexander v. S.C. Dep’t of Transp., No. 3:20-cv-

        04480-TLW (D.S.C. June 23, 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