Laine Craig Shore v. JOHN E. POTTER, Postmaster General

NOT RECOMMENDED FOR FULL-TEXT PUBLICATION
File Name: 06a0910n.06
Filed: December 20, 2006
No. 05-1937
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE SIXTH CIRCUIT
LAINE CRAIG SHORE,
Plaintiff-Appellant,
v.
JOHN E. POTTER, Postmaster General,
Defendant-Appellee.
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
ON APPEAL FROM THE
UNITED STATES DISTRICT
COURT FOR THE WESTERN
DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN
O P I N I O N
BEFORE: KENNEDY, COLE, and COOK, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM. Plaintiff-Appellant Laine Craig Shore appeals the entry of summary
judgment for Defendant-Appellee John E. Potter, Postmaster General (the “Postmaster”), on an age-
discrimination claim, brought under the Age Discrimination in Employment Act (“ADEA”), 29
U.S.C. § 623(a)(1)), and two retaliatory-discharge claims, one brought under Title VII of the Civil
Rights Act of 1964 (“Title VII”), 42 U.S.C.§ 2000e-3(a), and the other under the ADEA, 29 U.S.C.
§ 623(d). Specifically, the district court held that Shore failed to establish a prima facie case for both
retaliation claims and, with respect to all three claims, Shore failed to establish that the Postmaster’s
proffered reasons for terminating him were pretextual.
Having reviewed the district-court opinion de novo, see, e.g., Cincinnati Ins. Co. v. Zen
Design Group, Ltd., 329 F.3d 546, 551 (6th Cir. 2003), and upon careful review of the record and

-- 1 of 2 --

No. 05-1937
Shore v. Potter
- 2 -
the parties’ submissions, we conclude that the issuance of a more detailed opinion by this Court
would be duplicative and serve no useful purpose. Accordingly, for substantially the same reasons
set forth in the district court’s comprehensive and well-reasoned opinion, Shore v. Potter, No. 1:03-
cv-341, 2005 WL 1123738 (W.D. Mich. May 11, 2005), we AFFIRM the district court’s grant of
summary judgment for the Postmaster.

-- 2 of 2 --