Opinion
No. 06-1262-cv.
January 26, 2007.
Appeal from a judgment of the United States District Court for the Eastern District of New York (Joanna Seybert, Judge).
Arnold E. Di Joseph, Flanzig and Flanzig, LLP, (Arnold E. Di Joseph, III, of counsel), New York, NY, for Appellant.
Vincent Lipari, Assistant United States Attorney for the Eastern District of New York, (Roslynn R. Mauskopf, United States Attorney, Varuni Nelson, Assistant United States Attorney, of Counsel), Central Islip, NY, for Appellee.
PRESENT: Hon. ROBERT D. SACK, Hon. SONIA SOTOMAYOR and Hon. RICHARD C. WESLEY, Circuit Judges.
UPON DUE CONSIDERATION, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED, ADJUDGED AND DECREED that the judgment of the district court be, and it hereby is, AFFIRMED.
SUMMARY ORDER
We assume that the parties and counsel are familiar with the facts, the procedural history, and the scope of the issues presented on appeal. Mesimeris argues that the district court's conclusion on causation was clearly erroneous. But "we are not allowed to second-guess either the trial court's credibility assessments or its choice between permissible competing inferences." Ceraso v. Motiva Enterprises, LLC, 326 F.3d 303, 316 (2d Cir. 2003) (citing Anderson v. Bessemer City, N.C., 470 U.S. 564, 573-74, 105 S.Ct. 1504, 84 L.Ed.2d 518 (1985)).
We have considered all of Mesimeris's arguments and find them to be without merit.
For the foregoing reasons, the judgment of the District Court is hereby AFFIRMED.