Raymond Birr v. Charleston Packaging Company, Incorporated

UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 99-1614
RAYMOND BIRR,
Plaintiff - Appellant,
versus
CHARLESTON PACKAGING COMPANY, INCORPORATED;
BYRON WILLIAMS, M.D.; DOMINO SUGAR CORPO-
RATION,
Defendants - Appellees.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of
South Carolina, at Charleston. Falcon B. Hawkins, Senior District
Judge. (CA-97-2805-2-11AJ)
Submitted: January 27, 2000 Decided: February 22, 2000
Before WIDENER, MURNAGHAN, and TRAXLER, Circuit Judges.
Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Ray P. McClain, RAY P. MCCLAIN, ATTORNEY, P.A., Charleston, South
Carolina; Harriet McB. Johnson, Charleston, South Carolina, for
Appellant. J. Hamilton Stewart, J. Walker Coleman, IV, OGLETREE,
DEAKINS, NASH, SMOAK & STEWART, P.C., Charleston, South Carolina;
G. Mark Phillips, Mary Agnes Hood Craig, HOOD LAW FIRM, L.L.C.,
Charleston, South Carolina, for Appellees.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
See Local Rule 36(c).

-- 1 of 2 --

2
PER CURIAM:
Raymond Birr appeals the district court’s order dismissing his
civil action alleging employment discrimination. We have reviewed
the record and the district court’s opinion accepting the recom-
mendation of the magistrate judge and find no reversible error.
Accordingly, we affirm on the reasoning of the district court. See
Birr v. Charleston Packaging Co., Inc., No. CA-97-2805-2-11AJ
(D.S.C. Apr. 12, 1999). Also, we do not find that the district
court erred in denying Birr’s untimely motion to supplement the
record. We dispense with oral argument and grant Appellees’ motion
to decide the appeal without 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 --