Академический Документы
Профессиональный Документы
Культура Документы
No. 14-1079
FREDERICK FELT,
Plaintiff - Appellant,
v.
MEI TECHNOLOGIES, INC.; DELL SERVICES FEDERAL GOVERNMENT,
INC.,
Defendants - Appellees.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of
Maryland, at Greenbelt.
J. Frederick Motz, Senior District
Judge. (8:12-cv-02873-JFM)
Submitted:
Before GREGORY
Circuit Judge.
and
DIAZ,
Circuit
Decided:
Judges,
and
October 7, 2014
DAVIS,
Senior
PER CURIAM:
Frederick
Felt
appeals
the
district
courts
order
and
Dell
Services
Federal
Government,
Inc.,
on
his
the
Maryland
Human
Relations
Act,
and
the
Prince
We affirm.
judgment.
D.L.
ex
rel.
K.L.
v.
where
there
is
no
genuine
Balt.
Bd.
of
Sch.
Summary judgment is
dispute
as
to
any
477
U.S.
242,
248
(1986).
In
determining
whether
all
reasonable
inferences
therefrom,
in
the
light
most
evidence
presents
sufficient
disagreement
to
require
Id. at 248.
Because
retaliation,
familiar
his
Felt
Title
burden-shifting
presented
VII
no
claims
framework
direct
are
evidence
analyzed
established
under
in
of
the
McDonnell
Price v. Thompson,
in
adverse
action
protected
against
activity;
him;
(2)
and
the
(3)
defendant
there
was
took
a
an
causal
Id. at 212.
If a
the
basis
defendant
for
the
to
articulate
action.
Id.
Once
legitimate,
this
nonretaliatory
burden
is
met,
the
but-for
employer.
cause
of
the
alleged
adverse
action
by
the
2534 (2013).
3
We
facie
case
conclude
of
that
retaliation
Felt
failed
under
Title
to
establish
VII,
as
he
prima
did
not
activity.
The
record
reflects
that
the
two
MEI
significant
Moreover,
Felt
nonretaliatory
influence
failed
to
reasons
for
on
the
termination
demonstrate
that
terminating
the
his
decision.
legitimate,
employment
were
contentions
this
court
are
adequately
and
argument
presented
would
not
in
aid
the
the
materials
decisional
process.
AFFIRMED