Paula B. Ajisefinni v. Clifton Larson Allen, Llp

UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 23-1100
PAULA B. AJISEFINNI,
Plaintiff - Appellant,
v.
CLIFTON LARSON ALLEN, LLP,
Defendant - Appellee.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Maryland, at Greenbelt.
Deborah Lynn Boardman, District Judge. (8:19-cv-03284-DLB)
Submitted: July 20, 2023 Decided: July 24, 2023
Before NIEMEYER and THACKER, Circuit Judges, and KEENAN, Senior Circuit Judge.
Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Paula B. Ajisefinni, Appellant Pro Se. Paul Francis Evelius, WRIGHT, CONSTABLE &
SKEEN, LLP, Baltimore, Maryland, for Appellee.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

-- 1 of 2 --

2
PER CURIAM:
Paula B. Ajisefinni appeals the district court’s orders (1) granting summary
judgment in favor of Clifton Larson Allen, LLP, on Ajisefinni’s claims alleging race
discrimination, in violation of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, as amended, 42 U.S.C.
§§ 2000e to 2000e-17; age discrimination, in violation of the Age Discrimination in
Employment Act of 1967, as amended, 29 U.S.C. §§ 621 to 634; race and age
discrimination, in violation of the Maryland Fair Employment Practices Act, Md. Code
Ann., State Gov’t § 20-606(a)(1)(i); and breach of contract; and (2) denying Ajisefinni’s
Fed. R. Civ. P. 59(e) motion. We have reviewed the record and discern no reversible error.
Accordingly, we affirm the district court’s orders. Ajisefinni v. Clifton Larson Allen, LLP,
No. 8:19-cv-03284-DLB (D. Md. Nov. 18, 2022; Jan. 4, 2023). We note that Ajisefinni’s
claim that she received no notice of the motion for summary judgment is belied by the
record. Specifically, defense counsel certified that the summary judgment motion was
mailed to Ajisefinni at the correct home address, and subsequently emailed to Ajisefinni at
her known email address, and there was no indication either was undeliverable. In addition,
the district court docket confirms that the district court clerk sent a notice to Ajisefinni via
certified mail on June 1, 2022, informing Ajisefinni that she had 28 days to respond to the
motion. 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 --