SMITH v. DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY

Filing 72

MEMORANDUM OPINION re: Defendant's Motion for Summary Judgment. Signed by District Judge Liam O'Grady on 9/5/12. (dper)

i
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR TB
EASTERN DISTRICT OF VIRGINIA
Alexandria Division

'!

i

E

SEP - 5 2012

CLERK. U.S. DISTRICT COURT
ALEXANDRIA. VIRGINIA

SHER1 ELLIS SMITH,
Plaintiff,
Civil Action No.: 1:1 l-cv-724

v.

SECRETARY OF THE ARMY,

Defendant.

)
MEMORANDUM OPINION

The matter comes before the Court on Defendant Secretary of the Army's Motion for
Summary Judgment. For the reasons stated in open Court and those that follow, it is hereby
ORDERED that Defendant Secretary of the Army's Motion for Summary Judgment is
GRANTED.

1. Undisputed Facts'
Sheri Ellis-Smith ("Plaintiff) is an African-American female and a former employee of
the United States Army Corps of Engineers ("USACE"). Plaintiff worked as a contract specialist
with the Europe District of the USACE in Wiesbaden, Germany and Afghanistan from July 2005
to January 2011. Plaintiff brings four claims against Defendant in her filed Complaint: (1)
retaliation, (2) hostile work environment and disparate treatment based on retaliation, (3)

discrimination based on gender, and (4) discrimination based on race.
Local Civ. Rule 56(B): In determining a motion for summary judgment, the Court may assume that facts
identified by the moving party in its listing of material facts arc admitted, unless such a fact is controverted

in the statement of genuine issues filed in opposition to the motion. "Rule 56 does not impose upon the
district court a duty to sift through the record in search of evidence to support a party's opposition to
summary judgment." (quoting Forsyth v. Ban; 19 F.3d 1527, 1537 (5th Cir. 1994)); Republic Tobacco, L.P.
v. N. All. Trading. Co., 254 F. Supp. 2d 985, 993-94 (N.D. 111. 2002) ("Conclusory arguments unsupported
by the record are insufficient to preclude summary judgment, and we are not obliged to 'scour the record'
looking for factual disputes").