Summary Calendar SHIRLEY GREEN v. Eckerd Corp., doing business as Eckerd

* Pursuant to 5TH CIR. R. 47.5, the court has determined
that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent
except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH CIR.
R. 47.5.4.
United States Court of Appeals
Fifth Circuit
F I L E D
February 2, 2007
Charles R. Fulbruge III
Clerk
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT
No. 06-40550
Summary Calendar
SHIRLEY GREEN,
Plaintiff - Appellant,
v.
ECKERD CORP., doing business as Eckerd,
Defendants - Appellees.
--------------------
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Eastern District of Texas, Beaumont Division
USDC No. 1:04-CV-576
--------------------
Before DeMOSS, STEWART and PRADO, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM:*
Shirley Green, appearing pro se, appeals the district
court’s order granting the Defendant’s motion for summary
judgment and dismissing her suit for racial and sexual
discrimination in employment arising under the Civil Rights Act
of 1866, as amended, 42 U.S.C. § 1981; Title VII of the Civil
Rights Act of 1964, as amended, 42 U.S.C. §§ 2000e-2000h-6; and
the Texas Commission on Human Rights Act, TEX. LAB. CODE ANN.

-- 1 of 2 --

§21.001 et seq.
We review a district court’s grant of summary judgment de
novo. Gowesky v. Singing River Hosp. Sys., 321 F.3d 503, 507
(5th Cir. 2003). “The moving party is entitled to a judgment as
a matter of law [if] the nonmoving party has failed to make a
sufficient showing on an essential element of her case with
respect to which she has the burden of proof.” Celotex Corp. v.
Catrett, 477 U.S. 317, 323 (1986) (internal quotation marks
omitted).
We have carefully examined the briefs, the record excerpts,
and relevant portions of the record itself. For the reasons
stated in the district court’s comprehensive Memorandum and
Order, we affirm the decision to enter final judgment against
Green.
AFFIRMED.

-- 2 of 2 --