Renee Imeh Okon v. Montgomery County Council

UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 11-2249
RENEE IMEH OKON,
Plaintiff – Appellant,
v.
MONTGOMERY COUNTY COUNCIL; MONTGOMERY COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF
TRANSPORTATION; WASHINGTON METROPOLITAN AREA TRANSIT
AUTHORITY, (WMATA); VALERIE ERVIN, Montgomery County
Council President; ISIAH LEGGETT, Montgomery County
Executive; JOSEPH E. GODBOUT; JEANIE GODBOUT; ROBERT
MEDBERRY; VIRGINIA MEDBERRY; STEVE HAYES, Real Estate
Specialist; SHRIDHAR GONDALEKAR, Architect; PATRICIA VIA,
Chief Litigator; EILEEN BASAMAN, County Attorney; PAUL
LEONARD, Associate Attorney; CYNTHIA BRENNEMAN, Director of
Real Estate; TIMOTHY L. FIRESTINE, Chief Administrative
Officer; MARYLAND TRANSPORTATION AUTHORITY,
Defendants - Appellees.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of
Maryland, at Greenbelt. J. Frederick Motz, Senior District
Judge. (8:11-cv-01824-JFM)
Submitted: February 7, 2012 Decided: February 16, 2012
Before WYNN, DIAZ, and FLOYD, Circuit Judges.
Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Renee Imeh Okon, Appellant Pro Se. Patricia Lisehora Kane,
Edward Barry Lattner, COUNTY ATTORNEY’S OFFICE, Rockville,

-- 1 of 3 --

2
Maryland; Gerard J. Stief, Associate General Counsel,
Washington, D.C.; Timothy Brooks Hyland, Mary C. Lombardo,
STEIN, SPERLING BENNETT, DE JONG, SRISCOLL & GREENFEIG, PC,
Rockville, Maryland; Eric Scott Hartwig, MARYLAND TRANSIT
ADMINISTRATION, Baltimore, Maryland, for Appellees.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

-- 2 of 3 --

3
PER CURIAM:
Renee Imeh Okon appeals the district court’s order
dismissing this action alleging a violation of Title VI of the
Civil Rights Act of 1964. We have reviewed the record and find
no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons
stated by the district court. Okon v. Montgomery Cnty. Council,
No. 8:11-cv-01824-JFM (D. Md. Oct. 13, 2011). 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

-- 3 of 3 --