Michael Cornelius v. John M. McHugh
Filing
UNPUBLISHED PER CURIAM OPINION filed. Originating case number: 3:13-cv-01018-CMC Copies to all parties and the district court/agency. [999855943]. Mailed to: Michael Cornelius, Christopher Gibbs. [15-2094]
Appeal: 15-2094
Doc: 17
Filed: 06/16/2016
Pg: 1 of 3
UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 15-2094
MICHAEL CORNELIUS,
Plaintiff - Appellant,
v.
JOHN M. MCHUGH, Secretary of the Army,
Defendant - Appellee.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of
South Carolina, at Columbia.
Cameron McGowan Currie, Senior
District Judge. (3:13-cv-01018-CMC)
Submitted:
May 31, 2016
Decided:
June 16, 2016
Before SHEDD, THACKER, and HARRIS, Circuit Judges.
Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Michael Cornelius, Appellant Pro Se.
Terri Hearn Bailey,
Assistant United States Attorney, Christopher Gibbs, OFFICE OF
THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Columbia, South Carolina, for
Appellee.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
Appeal: 15-2094
Doc: 17
Filed: 06/16/2016
Pg: 2 of 3
PER CURIAM:
Michael Cornelius appeals from the district court’s entry
of judgment for Defendant following a bench trial in his civil
action under the Whistleblower Protection Act and Title VII of
the Civil Rights Act of 1964.
We affirm.
On appeal, Cornelius claims that the district court erred
in a host of ways at trial.
An appellant has the burden of
including in the record on appeal a transcript of all parts of
the
proceedings
material
to
the
issues
raised
Fed. R. App. P. 10(b); 4th Cir. R. 10(c)(1).
provided
supporting
transcripts
his
of
arguments
relevant
of
error
appeal.
Cornelius has not
portions
at
on
trial.
of
the
trial
Cornelius
also
fails to establish a basis to have the transcripts prepared at
government expense.
28 U.S.C. § 753 (2012).
By failing to
produce relevant transcripts or qualify for the production of
the
transcripts
at
government
review of these issues.
expense,
Cornelius
has
waived
Powell v. Estelle, 959 F.2d 22, 26
(5th Cir. 1992) (per curiam), abrog’n on other grounds recog’d
by Diaz v. Collins, 114 F.3d 69, 72 (5th Cir. 1997); Keller v.
Prince George’s Cty., 827 F.2d 952, 954 n.1 (4th Cir. 1987).
Cornelius’
court
are
made
remaining
in
arguments
largely
of
conclusory
error
by
fashion,
the
district
without
an
explanation as to how or why any such errors warrant reversal of
the
district
court’s
judgment.
2
Accordingly,
we
deem
these
Appeal: 15-2094
Doc: 17
Filed: 06/16/2016
issues abandoned.
Pg: 3 of 3
See 4th Cir. R. 34(b) (directing appealing
parties to present specific arguments in an informal brief and
stating that this court’s review on appeal is limited to the
issues raised in the informal brief); Wahi v. Charleston Area
Med. Ctr., Inc., 562 F.3d 599, 607 (4th Cir. 2009) (limiting
appellate review to arguments raised in the brief in accordance
with predecessor to Fed. R. App. P. 28(a)(8)(A)); Williams v.
Giant Food Inc., 370 F.3d 423, 430 n.4 (4th Cir. 2004) (noting
that appellate assertions not supported by argument are deemed
abandoned).
Cornelius fails to establish any basis for overturning the
district court’s judgment.
We
dispense
contentions
with
are
oral
Accordingly, we affirm the judgment.
argument
adequately
because
presented
in
the
facts
and
the
materials
legal
before
this court and argument would not aid the decisional process.
AFFIRMED
3
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?