Reginald Cobbins v. Engineered Plastic Component



Download PDF
United States Court of Appeals FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT ___________ No. 11-1321 ___________ Reginald L. Cobbins, * * Appellant, * * Appeal from the United States. v. * District Court for the * Western District of Missouri. Engineered Plastic Components, * * [UNPUBLISHED] Appellee, * * Dave Arnold; John Johnson; Chuck * Aust; Glenda Shackelford; Randy * Nelson; Chris Ross, * * Defendants. * ___________ Submitted: August 23, 2011 Filed: August 29, 2011 ___________ Before MURPHY, ARNOLD and BENTON, Circuit Judges. ___________ PER CURIAM. Reginald Cobbins appeals following the district court’s1 adverse grant of summary judgment in his employment-discrimination action. 1 The Honorable Nanette K. Laughery, United States District Judge for the Western District of Missouri. Appellate Case: 11-1321 Page: 1 Date Filed: 08/29/2011 Entry ID: 3823073 Engineered Plastic Components has moved to dismiss this appeal based on the form of Cobbins’s brief on appeal, and this court denies the motion. After careful de novo review of the merits of the appeal, see Anderson v. Larson, 327 F.3d 762, 767 (8th Cir. 2003), this court affirms. Cobbins’s discrimination and retaliation claims fail because the undisputed evidence showed he did not suffer an adverse employment action, see Gilbert v. Des Moines Area Cmty. Coll., 495 F.3d 906, 917 (8th Cir. 2007), Phillip v. Ford Motor Co., 413 F.3d 766, 768 (8th Cir. 2005). His hostile-work-environment claim fails, because the undisputed evidence showed, among other things, that EPC took appropriate remedial action, see Jenkins v. Winter, 540 F.3d 742, 749 (8th Cir. 2008). Cobbins’s remaining arguments are either not properly before us, or are meritless and do not need further discussion. This court affirms. See 8th Cir. R. 47B. _________________________________ -2- Appellate Case: 11-1321 Page: 2 Date Filed: 08/29/2011 Entry ID: 3823073

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?