Sonia I. Wriglesworth v. RYAN D. MCCARTHY, Secretary, U.S. Department of the Army

UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 20-1151
SONIA I. WRIGLESWORTH,
Plaintiff - Appellant,
v.
RYAN D. MCCARTHY, Secretary, U.S. Department of the Army,
Defendant - Appellee.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of North Carolina, at
Raleigh. James C. Dever III, District Judge. (5:18-cv-00339-D)
Submitted: November 17, 2020 Decided: November 19, 2020
Before MOTZ and KEENAN, Circuit Judges, and TRAXLER, Senior Circuit Judge.
Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Dennis L. Friedman, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, for Appellant. Robert J. Higdon, Jr.,
United States Attorney, Joshua B. Royster, Assistant United States Attorney, Rudy E.
Renfer, Assistant United States Attorney, OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES
ATTORNEY, Raleigh, North Carolina, for Appellee.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

-- 1 of 2 --

2
PER CURIAM:
Sonia I. Wriglesworth appeals the district court’s orders granting the Secretary of
the Army’s motion to dismiss Wriglesworth’s amended complaint alleging retaliation
under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, 42 U.S.C. §§ 2000e to 2000e-17, and
denying Wriglesworth’s Fed. R. Civ. P. 59(e) motion. We have reviewed the record and
considered the parties’ arguments and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm the
district court’s orders. Wriglesworth v. McCarthy, No. 5:18-cv-00339-D (E.D.N.C. Sept.
11, 2019; filed Dec. 12, 2019 & entered Dec. 13, 2019); see Fed. R. Civ. P. 52(a)(3) (“The
court is not required to state findings or conclusions when ruling on a motion under [Fed.
R. Civ. P.] 12[.]”). 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

-- 2 of 2 --