Skip to main content

BOYD v. Candice S. Walker, Ogletree Deakins, Defendant. (2018)

Reset A A Font size: Print

United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.

Harold BOYD, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Miller PIPELINE, Defendant-Appellee, Candice S. Walker, Ogletree Deakins, Defendant.

No. 17-1885

Decided: January 22, 2018

Before GREGORY, Chief Judge, and SHEDD and HARRIS, Circuit Judges. Harold Boyd, Appellant Pro Se. Homer Bernard Tisdale, III, OGLETREE DEAKINS NASH SMOAK & STEWART, PC, Charlotte, North Carolina, for Appellee.

Harold Boyd appeals the district court's order granting Miller Pipeline's dispositive motions and dismissing for lack of subject matter jurisdiction Boyd's employment discrimination suit, brought pursuant to Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, as amended, 42 U.S.C. §§ 2000e to 2000e-17 (2012). We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. Boyd v. Miller Pipeline, No. 3:16-cv-00278-FDW-DSC (W.D.N.C. July 13, 2017). 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

PER CURIAM:

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

Copied to clipboard