Clarence B. Jenkins, Jr. v. South Carolina Department of Employment Workforce

UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 21-2177
CLARENCE B. JENKINS, JR.,
Plaintiff - Appellant,
v.
SOUTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF EMPLOYMENT WORKFORCE;
SOUTH CAROLINA HUMAN AFFAIRS COMMISSION; SOUTH CAROLINA
OFFICE OF INSPECTOR GENERAL; SOUTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF
ADMINISTRATION; OFFICE OF SOUTH CAROLINA GOVERNOR,
Defendants - Appellees.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina, at
Columbia. Terry L. Wooten, Senior District Judge. (3:21-cv-01606-TLW)
Submitted: January 20, 2022 Decided: January 24, 2022
Before WILKINSON, DIAZ, and THACKER, Circuit Judges.
Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Clarence B. Jenkins, Jr., Appellant Pro Se. Robert Hayne Hodges, III, Lillian Marshall
Coleman Newton, GIGNILLIAT, SAVITZ & BETTIS LLP, Columbia, South Carolina,
for Appellees.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

-- 1 of 2 --

2
PER CURIAM:
Clarence B. Jenkins, Jr., appeals the district court’s order accepting the
recommendation of the magistrate judge and dismissing Jenkins’ civil complaint and the
court’s text order denying Jenkins’ motion for reconsideration. We conclude that the
district court correctly determined that Jenkins failed to properly exhaust his administrative
remedies prior to filing his complaint under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, as
amended, 42 U.S.C. §§ 2000e to 2000e-17. We also conclude that the district court judge
and the magistrate judge did not abuse their discretion in denying Jenkins’ motion to
recuse. Accordingly, we affirm the district court’s judgment. Jenkins v. S.C. Dep’t of Emp.
Workforce, No. 3:21-cv-01606-TLW (D.S.C. Sept. 27 & Oct. 13, 2021). 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 --