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)
05-2387•David De Sustar-Ware v. Nordstrom, Incorporated
05-2387Court of Appeals for the Fourth CircuitJul 14, 2006
UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 05-2387
DAVID DE SUSTAR-WARE,
Plaintiff - Appellant,
versus
NORDSTROM, INCORPORATED; TALXUCM SERVICES,
INCORPORATED,
Defendants - Appellees.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern
District of Virginia, at Alexandria. Gerald Bruce Lee, District
Judge. (CA-04-1318-1)
Submitted: June 28, 2006 Decided: July 14, 2006
Before KING and SHEDD, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit
Judge.
Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
David de Süstar-Ware, Appellant Pro Se. Ronda Brown Esaw,
MCGUIREWOODS, LLP, McLean, Virginia, for Appellee Nordstrom, Inc.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
See Local Rule 36(c).
-- 1 of 2 --
- 2 -
PER CURIAM:
David de Süstar-Ware appeals the district court’s order
dismissing his employment discrimination action for failure to
prosecute under Fed. R. Civ. P. 41. We have reviewed the record
and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we deny all pending
motions and affirm for the reasons stated by the district court.
See de Süstar-Ware v. Nordstrom, Inc., No. CA-04-1318-1 (E.D. Va.
filed Nov. 4, 2005 & entered Nov. 7, 2005). 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 --
Connect Omnilex to search the legal corpus from your AI assistant.