The AI workspace for legal professionals
- Legal research with access to more than 1 million sources
- Document automation
- Matter management
- Hosted in the EU and Switzerland
Try it free for 14 days (10 questions/day during trial)
The AI workspace for legal professionals
Try it free for 14 days (10 questions/day during trial)
01-1386•Mary Lou Recchia v. Ericsson, Incorporated
01-1386Court of Appeals for the Fourth CircuitAug 24, 2001
UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 01-1386
MARY LOU RECCHIA,
Plaintiff - Appellant,
versus
ERICSSON, INCORPORATED,
Defendant - Appellee.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western Dis-
trict of Virginia, at Lynchburg. Norman K. Moon, District Judge.
(CA-99-95-6)
Submitted: July 31, 2001 Decided: August 24, 2001
Before NIEMEYER, MOTZ, and TRAXLER, Circuit Judges.
Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Mary Lou Recchia, Appellant Pro Se. Bayard Easter Harris, Diane
Marie Baun, Daniel Clayton Summerlin, III, WOODS, ROGERS & HAZLE-
GROVE, Roanoke, Virginia, for Appellee.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
See Local Rule 36(c).
-- 1 of 2 --
2
PER CURIAM:
Mary Lou Recchia appeals the district court’s order granting
Ericsson, Incorporated’s motion for summary judgment in her employ-
ment discrimination action. We have reviewed the record and the
district court’s opinion and find no reversible error. According-
ly, although we deny Ericsson’s motion to dismiss for failure to
prosecute, we affirm on the reasoning of the district court. See
Recchia v. Ericsson, Inc., No. CA-99-95-6 (W.D. Va. Feb. 20, 2001).
We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal conten-
tions are adequately presented in the materials before the court
and argument would not aid the decisional process.
AFFIRMED
-- 2 of 2 --
Connect Omnilex to search the legal corpus from your AI assistant.