Eric L. Bullock, Appellant v. Megan J. Brennan, Postmaster General, United States Postal Service, Appellee (2016)

ORDER

Upon consideration of the motion for summary affirmance, the opposition thereto, and the reply, it is

ORDERED that the motion for summary affirmance be granted. The merits of the parties' positions are so clear as to warrant summary action. See Taxpayers Watchdog, Inc. v. Stanley, 819 F.2d 294, 297 (D.C. Cir. 1987) (per curiam). The district court did not abuse its discretion in denying appellant's motion to appoint counsel. See Gaviria v. Reynolds, 476 F.3d 940, 943 (D.C. Cir. 2007). And appellant has not shown he was entitled to a jury trial. The district court properly determined that any hybrid claim for breach of a collective bargaining agreement by appellee and breach of the duty of fair representation by appellant's union was barred by the six-month statute of limitations imposed by 29 U.S.C. § 160(b). See DelCostello v. Int'l Brotherhood of Teamsters, 462 U.S. 151, 164 (1983). Appellant makes no argument on appeal that summary judgment on his discrimination and retaliation claims under the Rehabilitation Act of 1973, 29 U.S.C. § 701 et seq, was in error. See U.S. ex rel. Totten v. Bombardier Corp., 380 F.3d 488, 497 (D.C. Cir. 2004) (argument not made on appeal is deemed waived).

Pursuant to D.C. Circuit Rule 36, this disposition will not be published. The Clerk is directed to withhold issuance of the mandate herein until seven days after disposition of any timely petition for rehearing or rehearing en banc. See Fed. R. App. P. 41(b); D.C. Cir. Rule 41.

Per Curiam