Larry Davis v. Weiser Security Services, Inc
Filing
UNPUBLISHED PER CURIAM OPINION filed. Originating case number: 3:13-cv-00522-MOC-DSC Copies to all parties and the district court/agency. [999914293]. Mailed to: appellant. [16-1486]
Appeal: 16-1486
Doc: 14
Filed: 08/22/2016
Pg: 1 of 2
UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 16-1486
LARRY DAVIS,
Plaintiff – Appellant,
v.
WEISER SECURITY SERVICES, INC; NORTH CAROLINA NATIONAL
GUARD; RANDY POWELL; JAMES ROSES; JERRY BOWMAN; GUY
MADERES,
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)
Submitted:
August 18, 2016
Decided:
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Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.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Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
Appeal: 16-1486
Doc: 14
Filed: 08/22/2016
Pg: 2 of 2
PER CURIAM:
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).
also
challenges
the
district
court’s
order
granting
Davis
Davis’
motion for reconsideration, but reaffirming the dismissal order.
On appeal, we confine our review to the issues raised in the
Appellant’s
brief.
See
4th
Cir.
R.
34(b).
Because
Davis’
informal brief does not challenge the basis for the district
court’s
dispositive
rulings,
Davis
has
review of the district court’s orders.
forfeited
appellate
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.
1999)
(failure
to
raise
issue
abandonment of that issue).
court’s orders.
in
opening
brief
constitutes
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
materials
before
this
court
and
argument
would
not
aid
the
decisional process.
AFFIRMED
2
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?