106 F. 3d 390 - Materson v. E Stokes Eeoc Eeo
106 F3d 390 Materson v. E Stokes Eeoc Eeo
106 F.3d 390
Robert MATERSON, Plaintiff--Appellant,
v.
Katheryne E. STOKES, Area Director, EEOC Norfolk Area
Office; Bob Siezer, EEO Coordi nator,
Commonwealth of Virginia/Corrections
Department, Defendants--Appellees.
No. 96-2022.
United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.
Submitted Jan. 23, 1997.
Decided Jan. 29, 1997.
NOTICE: Fourth Circuit Local Rule 36(c) states that citation of unpublished dispositions is disfavored except for establishing res judicata, estoppel, or the law of the case and requires service of copies of cited unpublished dispositions of the Fourth Circuit.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Norfolk. Henry C. Morgan, Jr., District Judge. (CA-95-985)
Robert Materson, Appellant Pro Se.
Lamont Navarro White, UNITED STATES EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY COMMISSION, Washington, D.C.; Ronald Nicholas Regnery, OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF VIRGINIA, Richmond, Virginia, for Appellees.
Before RUSSELL, WILKINS, and WILLIAMS, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM:
Advertisement
Appellant appeals the district court's order denying his motion for reconsideration. We have reviewed the record and the district court's opinion and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm on the reasoning of the district court. Materson v. Stokes, No. CA-95-985 (E.D. Va. June 22, 1996). We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before the court and argument would not aid the decisional process.
AFFIRMED