Court Opinion

ID: 9956782
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2024-04-02 21:00:43.06452+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T08:17:51.599630
License: Public Domain

USCA4 Appeal: 23-1656      Doc: 34         Filed: 04/01/2024     Pg: 1 of 2

                                             UNPUBLISHED

                               UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
                                   FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

                                               No. 23-1656

        TAMER ESCANDER,

                             Plaintiff - Appellant,

                      v.

        CHRISTINE WORMUTH,

                             Defendant - Appellee.

        Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of North Carolina, at
        Raleigh. Terrence W. Boyle, District Judge. (5:20-cv-00589-BO)

        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        Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

        ON BRIEF: Kelly B. McClanahan, NATIONAL SECURITY COUNSELORS, Rockville,
        Maryland, for Appellant. Michael F. Easley, Jr., United States Attorney, Sharon C. Wilson,
        Assistant United States Attorney, OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY,
        Raleigh, North Carolina, for Appellee.

        Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
USCA4 Appeal: 23-1656         Doc: 34      Filed: 04/01/2024     Pg: 2 of 2

        PER CURIAM:

               Tamer Escander appeals the district court’s order granting summary judgment in

        favor of the Secretary of the Army on Escander’s discrimination and retaliation claims,

        brought pursuant to 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 order. Escander v. Wormuth, No. 5:20-cv-00589-BO (E.D.N.C. June 7,

        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