Toulan v. DAP, Incorporated

Filing 920080326

Opinion

Download PDF
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 07-1086 FAYE ROBIN TOULAN, Plaintiff - Appellant, versus DAP, INCORPORATED, Defendant - Appellee. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Maryland, at Baltimore. Catherine C. Blake, District Judge. (1:05-cv-02254-CCB) Submitted: January 28, 2008 Decided: March 26, 2008 Before NIEMEYER, MICHAEL, and GREGORY, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Michael J. Snider, Ari Taragin, Jason I. Weisbrot, Jacob Statman, SNIDER & ASSOCIATES, LLC, Baltimore, Maryland, for Appellant. Douglas M. Topolski, Elena D. Marcuss, MCGUIREWOODS, LLP, Baltimore, Maryland, for Appellee. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. PER CURIAM: Faye Robin Toulan appeals the district court's order granting DAP, Incorporated's ("DAP") summary judgment motion on her retaliation and gender and national origin (American) discrimination claims, brought pursuant to Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, as amended, 42 U.S.C. 2000e to 2000e-17 (2000), and her salary discrimination claim, brought pursuant to the Equal Pay Act, 29 U.S.C. 206(d) (2000). record and find no reversible error. We have reviewed the Accordingly, we affirm for See Toulan v. DAP, Inc., We dispense with contentions are the reasons stated by the district court. No. 1:05-cv-02254-CCB (D. Md. Jan. 17, 2007).* oral argument because the facts and legal adequately presented in the materials before the court and argument would not aid the decisional process. AFFIRMED We deny Toulan's Fed. R. App. P. 28(j) request to defer action on her appeal pending the Supreme Court's consideration of CBOCS West, Inc. v. Humphries, 128 S. Ct. 30 (2007), and deny DAP's outstanding request for costs associated with the filing of a supplemental appendix. - 2 - *

Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.


Why Is My Information Online?