Simon v. TX Rehab Commission

* Pursuant to 5TH CIR. R. 47.5, the court has determined that
this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except
under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH CIR. R. 47.5.4.
United States Court of Appeals
Fifth Circuit
F I L E D
April 17, 2003
Charles R. Fulbruge III
Clerk
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT
____________________
No. 02-21098
Summary Calendar
ROSE SIMON,
Plaintiff-Appellant,
versus
TEXAS REHABILITATION COMMISSION,
Defendants-Appellees.
__________________ _________________________________________________________________
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Southern District of Texas
(H-01-CV-1200)
_________________________________________________________________
Before BARKSDALE, DEMOSS, and BENAVIDES, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM:*
Rose Simon, pro se, appeals the summary judgment awarded Texas
Rehabilitation Commission (TRC) against her race, gender, age, and
disability discrimination claims. The district court granted
summary judgment because: (1) the Eleventh Amendment barred the
age and disability discrimination claims against TRC; (2) TRC
produced legitimate, nondiscriminatory reasons for her discharge;
and (3) Simon’s allegations did not rise to the level of a hostile
work environment.

-- 1 of 3 --

2
A summary judgment is reviewed de novo. E.g., Meditrust
Financial Servs. Corp. v. Sterling Chemicals, Inc., 168 F.3d 211,
213 (5th Cir. 1999). Such judgment is appropriate when, viewing
the evidence in the light most favorable to the non-movant, there
is no genuine issue of material fact and the movant is entitled to
a judgment as a matter of law. Celotex Corp. v. Catrett, 477 U.S.
317, 322-24 (1986); FED. R. CIV. P. 56(c).
Simon contends the Eleventh Amendment is no bar to her claims.
However, the Americans with Disabilities Act, 42 U.S.C. § 12101 et
seq., and the Age Discrimination in Employment Act, 29 U.S.C. § 621
et seq., did not abrogate state sovereign immunity. Bd. of
Trustees of Univ. of Alabama v. Garrett, 531 U.S. 356, 360 (2001)
(disability discrimination); Kimel v. Florida Bd. of Regents, 528
U.S. 62, 67 (2000) (age discrimination). Simon has not produced
any evidence showing Texas waived sovereign immunity.
For her race and gender discrimination claims under Title VII
of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, 42 U.S.C. § 2000e et seq., Simon
has produced no evidence to show that TRC’s nondiscriminatory
reasons for discharge — improper request for confidential
psychological records and general communication problems — were
pretextual. See Reeves v. Sanderson Plumbing Prods., Inc., 530
U.S. 133, 143 (2000).
Finally, Simon’s vague allegations of sex discrimination in
her appellate brief do not rise to the level of a hostile work

-- 2 of 3 --

3
environment. Ramsey v. Henderson, 286 F.3d 264, 269 (5th Cir.
2002).
AFFIRMED

-- 3 of 3 --