Court Opinion

ID: 9411161
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-07-25 21:01:38.855596+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T17:21:04.867897
License: Public Domain

USCA4 Appeal: 23-1100      Doc: 27         Filed: 07/24/2023    Pg: 1 of 2

                                            UNPUBLISHED

                               UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
                                   FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

                                              No. 23-1100

        PAULA B. AJISEFINNI,

                            Plaintiff - Appellant,

                     v.

        CLIFTON LARSON ALLEN, LLP,

                            Defendant - Appellee.

        Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Maryland, at Greenbelt.
        Deborah Lynn Boardman, District Judge. (8:19-cv-03284-DLB)

        Submitted: July 20, 2023                                          Decided: July 24, 2023

        Before NIEMEYER and THACKER, Circuit Judges, and KEENAN, Senior Circuit Judge.

        Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

        Paula B. Ajisefinni, Appellant Pro Se. Paul Francis Evelius, WRIGHT, CONSTABLE &
        SKEEN, LLP, Baltimore, Maryland, for Appellee.

        Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
USCA4 Appeal: 23-1100         Doc: 27        Filed: 07/24/2023      Pg: 2 of 2

        PER CURIAM:

               Paula B. Ajisefinni appeals the district court’s orders (1) granting summary

        judgment in favor of Clifton Larson Allen, LLP, on Ajisefinni’s claims alleging race

        discrimination, in violation of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, as amended, 42 U.S.C.

        §§ 2000e to 2000e-17; age discrimination, in violation of the Age Discrimination in

        Employment Act of 1967, as amended, 29 U.S.C. §§ 621 to 634; race and age

        discrimination, in violation of the Maryland Fair Employment Practices Act, Md. Code

        Ann., State Gov’t § 20-606(a)(1)(i); and breach of contract; and (2) denying Ajisefinni’s

        Fed. R. Civ. P. 59(e) motion. We have reviewed the record and discern no reversible error.

        Accordingly, we affirm the district court’s orders. Ajisefinni v. Clifton Larson Allen, LLP,

        No. 8:19-cv-03284-DLB (D. Md. Nov. 18, 2022; Jan. 4, 2023). We note that Ajisefinni’s

        claim that she received no notice of the motion for summary judgment is belied by the

        record. Specifically, defense counsel certified that the summary judgment motion was

        mailed to Ajisefinni at the correct home address, and subsequently emailed to Ajisefinni at

        her known email address, and there was no indication either was undeliverable. In addition,

        the district court docket confirms that the district court clerk sent a notice to Ajisefinni via

        certified mail on June 1, 2022, informing Ajisefinni that she had 28 days to respond to the

        motion. 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