Gary Phillips v. Nlyte Software Americas Ltd.

Filing

UNPUBLISHED PER CURIAM OPINION filed. Originating case number: 8:13-cv-01965-DKC. Copies to all parties and the district court. [999654298].. [15-1262]

Appeal: 15-1262

Doc: 24

Filed: 09/04/2015

Pg: 1 of 3

UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 15-1262

GARY T. PHILLIPS,
Plaintiff - Appellant,
v.
NLYTE SOFTWARE AMERICAS LIMITED,
Defendant - Appellee.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of
Maryland, at Greenbelt.
Deborah K. Chasanow, Senior District
Judge. (8:13-cv-01965-DKC)

Submitted:

August 31, 2015

Decided:

September 4, 2015

Before GREGORY, AGEE, and FLOYD, Circuit Judges.

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Barton David Moorstein, BLANK, MOORSTEIN & LIPSHUTZ, LLP,
Rockville, Maryland, for Appellant. Robert G. Young, BOWDITCH &
DEWEY, LLP, Framingham, Massachusetts, for Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

Appeal: 15-1262

Doc: 24

Filed: 09/04/2015

Pg: 2 of 3

PER CURIAM:
Gary

T.

Phillips

appeals

the

district

court’s

order

granting summary judgment to the Defendant in his civil action
claiming breach of contract and violation of the Maryland Wage
Payment and Collection Law.

On appeal, he contends that the

district court erred because his employment contract required
the Defendant to pay him a mathematically calculated commission
when a sale occurred in his geographic region; the terms of his
compensation plan were ambiguous; and the Defendant withheld his
commission “not as a result of a bona fide dispute.”
We

review

whether

the

district

court

erred

We affirm.
in

granting

summary judgment de novo, applying the same legal standards as
the district court and viewing the evidence in the light most
favorable to the nonmoving party.

Walker v. Mod-U-Kraf Homes,

LLC, 775 F.3d 202, 207 (4th Cir. 2014).

The district court must

enter summary judgment “against a party who fails to make a
showing

sufficient

to

establish

the

existence

of

an

element

essential to that party’s case, and on which that party will
bear the burden of proof at trial.”
477 U.S. 317, 322 (1986).

Celotex Corp. v. Catrett,

“Where the record taken as a whole

could not lead a rational trier of fact to find for the nonmoving party, there is no genuine issue for trial.”

Matsushita

Elec. Indus. Co. v. Zenith Radio Corp., 475 U.S. 574, 587 (1986)
(citation and internal quotation marks omitted).
2

Appeal: 15-1262

Doc: 24

Filed: 09/04/2015

Pg: 3 of 3

We have reviewed the record and the parties’ briefs, and we
conclude that the district court did not err in granting summary
judgment

to

the

Defendant.

Accordingly,

reasons stated by the district court.

we

affirm

for

the

See Phillips v. Nlyte

Software Americas Ltd., No. 8:13-cv-01965-DKC (D. Md. Feb. 9,
2015).
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

3