Court Opinion

ID: 9375076
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-02-24 21:00:47.218258+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T17:16:56.241303
License: Public Domain

USCA4 Appeal: 22-1117      Doc: 32         Filed: 02/23/2023    Pg: 1 of 2

                                            UNPUBLISHED

                               UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
                                   FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

                                              No. 22-1117

        WARREN S. WHITLOCK,

                            Plaintiff - Appellant,

                     v.

        CHRISTINE WORMUTH, Secretary of the Army,

                            Defendant - Appellee.

        Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at
        Alexandria. Anthony John Trenga, Senior District Judge. (1:21-cv-00008-AJT-JFA)

        Submitted: February 21, 2023                                 Decided: February 23, 2023

        Before NIEMEYER and DIAZ, Circuit Judges, and MOTZ, Senior Circuit Judge.

        Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

        ON BRIEF: Richard L. Swick, David H. Sharpiro, SWICK & SHAPIRO, P.C.,
        Washington, D.C., for Appellant. Jessica D. Aber, United States Attorney, Matthew J.
        Mezger, Assistant United States Attorney, OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES
        ATTORNEY, Alexandria, Virginia, for Appellee.

        Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
USCA4 Appeal: 22-1117      Doc: 32        Filed: 02/23/2023     Pg: 2 of 2

        PER CURIAM:

              Warren S. Whitlock appeals the district court’s order granting summary judgment

        in favor of the Secretary of the Army on Whitlock’s retaliation and race and sex

        discrimination 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 for the reasons stated by the district court. See Whitlock v.

        Wormuth, No. 1:21-cv-00008-AJT-JFA (E.D. Va. Dec. 28, 2021). 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