Rizkalla v. Engineering Mgmt

Filing 920070327

Opinion

UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 06-1696

LEANNA RIZKALLA, Plaintiff - Appellant, versus ENGINEERING, INCORPORATED, MANAGEMENT & INTEGRATION, Defendant - Appellee.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Alexandria. Gerald Bruce Lee, District Judge. (1:05-cv-00957-GBL)

Submitted: March 22, 2007

Decided: March 27, 2007

Before WIDENER and WILKINSON, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge.

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Peter C. Cohen, CHARLSON BREDEHOFT & COHEN, P.C., Reston, Virginia, for Appellant. Seth C. Berenzweig, Jeffrey L. Rhodes, ALBO & OBLON, LLP, Arlington, Virginia, for Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

PER CURIAM: Leanna Rizkalla appeals the district court's order

granting summary judgment in favor of her employer, Engineering, Management, & Integration, Inc., on her claim of retaliation brought under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, as amended, 42 U.S.C. §§ 2000e to 2000e-17 (2000). Summary judgment

is appropriate only if, viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to the non-moving party, there are no genuine issues of material fact in dispute and the moving party is entitled to judgment as a matter of law. Anderson v. Liberty Lobby, Inc., 477

U.S. 242, 255 (1986); Evans v. Technologies Applications & Serv. Co., 80 F.3d 954, 958 (4th Cir. 1996). the briefs and joint appendix and We have thoroughly reviewed find no reversible error.

Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. Rizkalla v. Engineering, Mgmt., & Integration, Inc., No. We dispense with oral

1:05-cv-00957-GBL (E.D. Va. Aug. 29, 2006).

argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before the court and argument would not aid the decision making process.

AFFIRMED

- 2 -