Opinion
22-2210
06-26-2023
JUPITER DENNELL WILSON, SR., Plaintiff - Appellant, v. CITY OF CHESAPEAKE, in its official capacity, Defendant-Appellee.
Jupiter Dennell Wilson, Sr., Appellant Pro Se. Ellen Frances Bergren, OFFICE OF THE CITY ATTORNEY, Chesapeake, Virginia, for Appellee.
UNPUBLISHED
Submitted: June 22, 2023
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Norfolk. Mark S. Davis, Chief District Judge. (2:19-cv-00486-MSD-RJK)
Jupiter Dennell Wilson, Sr., Appellant Pro Se.
Ellen Frances Bergren, OFFICE OF THE CITY ATTORNEY, Chesapeake, Virginia, for Appellee.
Before HARRIS and HEYTENS, Circuit Judges, and TRAXLER, Senior Circuit Judge.
Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
PER CURIAM
Jupiter Dennell Wilson, Sr., appeals the district court's orders granting summary judgment in favor of the City of Chesapeake on Wilson's discrimination and retaliation claims, brought pursuant to Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, 42 U.S.C. §§ 2000e to 2000e-17, and the Age Discrimination in Employment Act, 29 U.S.C. §§ 621to 634, and denying Wilson's postjudgment motions. Limiting our review of the record to the issues raised in Wilson's informal brief, we find no reversible error. See 4th Cir. R. 34(b); see also Jackson v. Lightsey, 775 F.3d 170, 177 (4th Cir. 2014) ("The informal brief is an important document; under Fourth Circuit rules, our review is limited to issues preserved in that brief."). Accordingly, we affirm the district court's orders. See Wilson v. City of Chesapeake, No. 2:19-cv-00486-MSD-RJK (E.D. Va. Feb. 25, 2022; Nov. 16, 2022). 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