Gregory Rheubottom v. WMATA

Filing

UNPUBLISHED PER CURIAM OPINION filed. Originating case number: 8:09-cv-00485-PJM Copies to all parties and the district court/agency. [999110867].. [12-2423]

Appeal: 12-2423

Doc: 17

Filed: 05/20/2013

Pg: 1 of 4

UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 12-2423

GREGORY RHEUBOTTOM,
Plaintiff - Appellant,
v.
WASHINGTON METROPOLITAN AREA TRANSIT AUTHORITY,
Defendant – Appellee,
and
ALSTOM TRANSPORTATION, INC.; IFE NORTH AMERICA,
Defendants.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of
Maryland, at Greenbelt.
Peter J. Messitte, Senior District
Judge. (8:09-cv-00485-PJM)

Submitted:

April 12, 2013

Decided:

May 20, 2013

Before KEENAN, WYNN, and DIAZ, Circuit Judges.

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Douglas K. Allston, Jr., ALLSTON & ASSOCIATES, Greenbelt,
Maryland, for Appellant.
Mark F. Sullivan, Deputy General
Counsel, Carol B. O’Keeffe, General Counsel, Gerard J. Stief,
Senior Associate General Counsel, Nicholas L. Phucas, Assistant

Appeal: 12-2423

Doc: 17

Filed: 05/20/2013

Pg: 2 of 4

General Counsel, WASHINGTON METROPOLITAN AREA TRANSIT AUTHORITY,
Washington, D.C., for Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

2

Appeal: 12-2423

Doc: 17

Filed: 05/20/2013

Pg: 3 of 4

PER CURIAM:
In
appeals

the

this

personal

district

injury

court’s

case,

order

Gregory
granting

supplemental motion for summary judgment.

Rheubottom
Appellee’s

On appeal, he argues

that the district court misunderstood the evidence and erred in
granting the motion.

We disagree, and affirm the judgment.

We review whether a district court erred in granting
summary judgment de novo, applying the same legal standards as
the district court.
Cir. 2012).

Martin v. Lloyd, 700 F.3d 132, 135 (4th

Summary judgment is only appropriate where there is

no genuine issue of material fact and the movant is entitled to
judgment as a matter of law.

Id.

In determining whether there

is a genuine issue of material fact, we view the evidence in the
light most favorable to the nonmoving party.

Id.

However, a

nonmoving party cannot defeat summary judgment with merely a
scintilla of evidence.

American Arms Int’l v. Herbert, 563 F.3d

78, 82 (4th Cir. 2009).
could

not

nonmoving

lead

a

party,

“Where the record taken as a whole

rational
there

trier

is

no

of

fact

genuine

to

find

issue

for

for

the

trial.”

Matsushita Elec. Indus. Co. v. Zenith Radio Corp., 475 U.S. 574,
587 (1986) (internal quotation marks omitted).
We
district

have

court’s

supplemental

motion

reviewed
stated
for

the

record

reasons
summary
3

for

and

agree

granting

judgment.

with

the

Appellee’s

Accordingly,

we

Appeal: 12-2423

Doc: 17

Filed: 05/20/2013

Pg: 4 of 4

affirm the district court’s order.

See Rheubottom v. Washington

Metro. Area Transit Auth., No. 8:09-cv-00485-PJM (D. Md. Oct.
19, 2012).
legal
before

We dispense with oral argument because the facts and

contentions
this

court

are

adequately

and

argument

presented

would

not

in
aid

the
the

materials
decisional

process.
AFFIRMED

4