Ronald Barkhorn, et al.; MICHAEL SCHULTZ; RICHARD DELAWDER; JOHN DELAWDER v. Ports America Chesapeake, LLC

UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 13-2457
RONALD BARKHORN, et al.; MICHAEL SCHULTZ; RICHARD DELAWDER;
JOHN DELAWDER,
Plaintiffs - Appellants,
and
JOHN DELWADER; RICK DEWALDER; MIKE SHULTZ; TERRY NEBLITT;
JOHN ZIELINSKI; MARK HAGOHAN; JAMES RUFF; FRANCESCO SOZIO;
JOE WILLIAMS; JOHN GRIFFIN; PAUL SINGER; BOB SMOOT; JOHN
ZELINSKI; MARK HAGOPIAN; ROBERT SMOOT; JIM GRIFFIN,
Plaintiffs,
v.
PORTS AMERICA CHESAPEAKE, LLC,
Defendant - Appellee,
and
STEAMSHIP TRADE ASSOCIATION OF BALTIMORE,
Defendant.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of
Maryland, at Baltimore. Susan K. Gauvey, Magistrate Judge.
(1:10-cv-00750-SKG)
Submitted: April 30, 2014 Decided: May 21, 2014
Before SHEDD and FLOYD, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior
Circuit Judge.

-- 1 of 4 --

2
Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Ronald Barkhorn, Michael Schultz, Richard Delawder, John
Delawder, Appellants Pro Se. Michael J. Collins, MICHAEL J.
COLLINS, PC, Highland, Maryland, for Appellee.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

-- 2 of 4 --

3
PER CURIAM:
Ronald Barkhorn, Michael Schultz, Richard Delawder,
and John Delawder appeal the magistrate judge’s ruling* granting
judgment in favor of Ports America Chesapeake, LLC (“Ports
America”), after a bench trial in their civil action for
discrimination and retaliation and the magistrate judge’s order
denying their post-judgment motions. We affirm.
We review a judgment following a bench trial under a
mixed standard of review. Factual findings may be reversed only
if clearly erroneous, while conclusions of law are examined de
novo. Roanoke Cement Co. v. Falk Corp., 413 F.3d 431, 433
(4th Cir. 2005). “[W]hen a district court’s factual finding in
a bench trial is based upon assessments of witness credibility,
such finding is deserving of the highest degree of appellate
deference.” Evergreen Int’l, S.A. v. Norfolk Dredging Co.,
531 F.3d 302, 308 (4th Cir. 2008) (internal quotation marks
omitted).
Having reviewed the parties’ informal briefs and the
record before us, we perceive no basis on which to overturn the
magistrate judge’s judgment. We reject as without merit
Appellants’ argument that the magistrate judge applied the wrong
* The parties in this case consented to the jurisdiction of
the magistrate judge under 28 U.S.C. § 636(c)(1) (2012).

-- 3 of 4 --

4
legal standard in assessing their prima facie case for
discrimination and defer to the magistrate judge’s
findings - premised on credibility determinations - that Ports
America’s stated reasons for its employment decisions were not a
pretext for discrimination. We further reject as without merit
Appellants’ contentions that the case should be remanded for
additional fact-finding by the magistrate judge and that their
earnings reflect discrimination and retaliation.
With respect to the magistrate judge’s order denying
Appellants’ post-judgment motions, we have reviewed the record
and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm the
magistrate judge’s judgment and further affirm the denial order
for the reasons stated by the magistrate judge. Barkhorn v.
Ports Am. Chesapeake, LLC, No. 1:10-cv-00750-SKG (D. Md.
Mar. 29 & Nov. 5, 2013). We dispense with oral argument because
the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the
materials before this court and argument would not aid the
decisional process.
AFFIRMED

-- 4 of 4 --