Stephen Brooks v. Microsoft Corporation

UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 03-2345
STEPHEN BROOKS,
Plaintiff - Appellant,
versus
MICROSOFT CORPORATION,
Defendant - Appellee.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western
District of North Carolina, at Charlotte. Carl Horn, III,
Magistrate Judge. (CA-02-257-3-H)
Submitted: February 25, 2004 Decided: March 11, 2004
Before WIDENER, WILKINSON, and DUNCAN, Circuit Judges.
Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Stephen Brooks, Appellant Pro Se. Richard Lee Rainey, Amy L. Cox
Gruendel, WOMBLE, CARLYLE, SANDRIDGE & RICE, PLLC, Charlotte, North
Carolina; Charles Archibald Edwards, WOMBLE, CARLYLE, SANDRIDGE &
RICE, Raleigh, North Carolina; Richard H. Sauer, MICROSOFT
CORPORATION, Redmond, Washington, for Appellee.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
See Local Rule 36(c).

-- 1 of 2 --

*The parties consented to the jurisdiction of a magistrate
judge under 28 U.S.C. § 636(c) (2000).
PER CURIAM:
Stephen Brooks appeals the magistrate judge’s order
dismissing his action under the Americans with Disabilities Act in
which he alleged his employer failed to accommodate his
disability.* We have reviewed the record and find no reversible
error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the
magistrate judge. See Brooks v. Microsoft, No. CA-02-257-3-H
(W.D.N.C. Sept. 22, 2003). 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

-- 2 of 2 --