Larry Davis v. Weiser Security Services, Inc
UNPUBLISHED PER CURIAM OPINION filed. Originating case number: 3:13-cv-00522-MOC-DSC Copies to all parties and the district court/agency. . Mailed to: appellant. [16-1486]
Pg: 1 of 2
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
Plaintiff – Appellant,
WEISER SECURITY SERVICES, INC; NORTH CAROLINA NATIONAL
GUARD; RANDY POWELL; JAMES ROSES; JERRY BOWMAN; GUY
Defendants - Appellees.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western
District of North Carolina, at Charlotte. Max O. Cogburn, Jr.,
District Judge. (3:13-cv-00522-MOC-DSC)
August 18, 2016
August 22, 2016
Before WILKINSON, KING, and KEENAN, Circuit Judges.
Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Larry Davis, Appellant Pro Se. Elizabeth Ruth Dangel, OGLETREE
DEAKINS NASH SMOAK & STEWART, PC, Charlotte, North Carolina;
Vanessa N. Totten, Assistant Attorney General, Raleigh, North
Carolina, for Appellees.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
Pg: 2 of 2
Larry Davis appeals from the district court’s judgment in
Defendants’ favor on Davis’ racial harassment and discrimination
claims, brought pursuant to Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of
1964, as amended, 42 U.S.C. §§ 2000e to 2000e-17 (2012).
motion for reconsideration, but reaffirming the dismissal order.
On appeal, we confine our review to the issues raised in the
informal brief does not challenge the basis for the district
review of the district court’s orders.
See Williams v. Giant
Food Inc., 370 F.3d 423, 430 n.4 (4th Cir. 2004); see also
Edwards v. City of Goldsboro, 178 F.3d 231, 241 n.6 (4th Cir.
abandonment of that issue).
Accordingly, we affirm the district
See Davis v. Weiser Sec. Servs., Inc., No.
3:13-cv-00522-MOC-DSC (W.D.N.C. filed Mar. 1, 2016, entered Mar.
2, 2016; Mar. 31, 2016).
We dispense with oral argument because
the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the
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?