No. 12-2330
MILLIS STOKES,
Plaintiff - Appellant,
v.
COMMONWEALTH OF VIRGINIA DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS,
Defendant - Appellee.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern
District of Virginia, at Richmond.
Robert E. Payne, Senior
District Judge. (3:10-cv-00370-REP-MHL)
Submitted:
Decided:
PER CURIAM:
Millis
Stokes
appeals
the
district
courts
order
retaliation
based
on
VDOCs
failure
to
rehire
him.
We
affirm.
We review a district courts grant of summary judgment
de
novo,
drawing
reasonable
inferences
in
the
light
most
Johnson & Co., 639 F.3d 111, 119 (4th Cir. 2011).
Summary
Only
disputes over facts that might affect the outcome of the suit
under
the
governing
summary judgment.
242, 248 (1986).
law
will
properly
preclude
the
entry
of
See Thompson v. Potomac Elec. Power Co., 312 F.3d 645, 649 (4th
Cir.
2002)
(Conclusory
or
speculative
allegations
do
not
non-moving
partys]
case.
(internal
quotation
marks
omitted)).
Title
against
any
VII
prohibits
applicants
for
an
employer
employment
from
.
discriminating
because
[the
proceeding,
U.S.C.A. 2000e-3(a).
or
hearing
under
Title
VII.
42
framework
established
in
McDonnell
facie
case
of
retaliation,
Douglas
To establish a
plaintiff
must
show
shifts
to
nondiscriminatory
the
employer
reason
for
its
to
articulate
actions.
legitimate,
McDonnell
Douglas
the
plaintiff
has
been
the
victim
of
intentional
Cir.
2010)
(internal
quotation
marks
and
alteration
omitted).
After review of the record and the parties briefs, we
conclude that the district court did not err in granting summary
judgment to VDOC.
Stokes challenges
failed
evidence.
to
substantiate
this
claim
with
admissible
We
dispense
contentions
with
are
oral
argument
adequately
because
presented
in
the
facts
and
the
materials
legal
before
this court and argument would not aid the decisional process.
AFFIRMED