Christopher Eugene Buckner v. UPS

Filing

UNPUBLISHED PER CURIAM OPINION filed. Originating case number: 5:14-cv-00539-FL Copies to all parties and the district court/agency. [999778167]. Mailed to: Buckener. [15-2304]

Appeal: 15-2304

Doc: 16

Filed: 03/21/2016

Pg: 1 of 2

UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 15-2304

CHRISTOPHER EUGENE BUCKNER,
Plaintiff - Appellant,
v.
UNITED PARCEL SERVICE, INC.; TEAMSTERS LOCAL 391,
Defendants - Appellees.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern
District of North Carolina, at Raleigh.
Louise W. Flanagan,
District Judge. (5:14-cv-00539-FL)

Submitted:

March 17, 2016

Decided:

March 21, 2016

Before WILKINSON, NIEMEYER, and KING, Circuit Judges.

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Christopher Eugene Buckner, Appellant Pro Se.
Susan Ballantine
Molony, ALSTON & BIRD, LLP, Charlotte, North Carolina; Glenn G.
Patton, ALSTON & BIRD, LLP, Atlanta, Georgia; J. David James,
SMITH, JAMES, ROWLETT & COHEN, LLP, Greensboro, North Carolina,
for Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

Appeal: 15-2304

Doc: 16

Filed: 03/21/2016

Pg: 2 of 2

PER CURIAM:
Christopher Eugene Buckner filed a civil action in state
court against United Parcel Service, Inc., and Teamsters Local
391, asserting various violations of North Carolina law.

The

district court determined that Buckner’s claims were preempted
under the Labor Management Relations Act and that removal to
federal court was therefore proper.

Buckner now appeals the

district court’s order accepting in part and denying in part the
magistrate judge’s recommendation, denying Buckner’s motion to
remand, dismissing some claims with prejudice as barred by res
judicata

and

the

statute

of

limitations,

and

dismissing

his

remaining claims without prejudice for failure to state a claim
upon which relief may be granted.
and find no reversible error.

We have reviewed the record

Accordingly, we affirm for the

reasons stated by the district court.

Buckner v. United Parcel

Serv., Inc., No. 5:14-cv-00539-FL (E.D.N.C. Sept. 23, 2015).
dispense

with

contentions

are

oral

argument

adequately

because

presented

in

the
the

facts

We

and

legal

materials

before

this court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

AFFIRMED

2