Rasheed Oshodi v. Lockheed Martin Corporation

FILED
U.S. COURT OF APPEALS
ELEVENTH CIRCUIT
JANUARY 9, 2012
JOHN LEY
CLERK
[DO NOT PUBLISH]
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE ELEVENTH CIRCUIT
________________________
No. 11-10979
Non-Argument Calendar
________________________
D.C. Docket No. 1:09-cv-01341-JEC
RASHEED OSHODI,
llllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllll Plaintiff - Appellant,
versus
LOCKHEED MARTIN CORPORATION,
llllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllll Defendant - Appellee.
________________________
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Northern District of Georgia
________________________
(January 9, 2012)
Before BARKETT, WILSON and ANDERSON, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM:

-- 1 of 2 --

Rasheed Oshodi, proceeding pro se, appeals the district court’s denial of his
motion for sanctions and grant of Defendant’s motion for summary judgment in an
action alleging race and disability discrimination, failure to accommodate,
retaliation, and interference, under the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990, 42
U.S.C. § 12112; Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, 42 U.S.C. §§ 2000e-
2(a)(1), 2000e-3(a); 42 U.S.C. § 1981; the Rehabilitation Act of 1973, 29 U.S.C.
§ 794; and the Family and Medical Leave Act, 29 U.S.C. § 2615.
Although we construe pro se briefs liberally, it is not the court’s place to
argue the appellant’s case for him. GJR Investments Inc. v. County of Escambia,
Fla., 132 F.3d 1359, 1369 (11th Cir. 1998), overruled on other grounds as
recognized in Randall v. Scott, 610 F.3d 701, 709 (11th Cir. 2010). A pro se
litigant who offers no substantive argument on an issue in his brief abandons the
issue on appeal. See Timson v. Sampson, 518 F.3d 870, 874 (11th Cir. 2008) (per
curiam).
Oshodi has abandoned all of his claims on appeal by failing to offer any
legal arguments in support of his position. Furthermore, there is no error in the
district court’s holding.
AFFIRMED.
2

-- 2 of 2 --