Chad Williams v. Multi-Color Corporation, Inc.

United States Court of Appeals
For the Seventh Circuit
Chicago, Illinois 60604
Submitted January 23, 2024 *
Decided January 24, 2024
Before
MICHAEL Y. SCUDDER, Circuit Judge
THOMAS L. KIRSCH II, Circuit Judge
JOHN Z. LEE, Circuit Judge
No. 23-2457
CHAD WILLIAMS,
Plaintiff-Appellant,
v.
MULTI-COLOR CORPORATION, INC.,
Defendant-Appellee.
Appeal from the United States District
Court for the Eastern District of
Wisconsin.
No. 19-C-0847
Lynn Adelman,
Judge.
O R D E R
After Chad Williams was passed over for two promotions with Multi-Color
Corporation, he sued the company for racial discrimination in violation of Title VII of
the Civil Rights Act of 1964. See 42 U.S.C. § 2000e-2. The district court ultimately entered
summary judgment for the company because Williams did not provide evidence of a
* We have agreed to decide the case without oral argument because the briefs and
record adequately present the facts and legal arguments, and oral argument would not
significantly aid the court. FED. R. A PP. P. 34(a)(2)(C).
NONPRECEDENTIAL DISPOSITION
To be cited only in accordance with FED. R. A PP. P. 32.1

-- 1 of 2 --

No. 23-2457 Page 2
discriminatory motive, let alone evidence that the company’s proffered reasons for its
decisions were pretext for discrimination.
On appeal, Williams generally challenges the court’s ruling but does not address
its reasoning or provide any meaningful basis for disturbing the judgment. See FED. R.
A PP. P. 28(a)(8) (brief must contain the appellant’s “contentions and the reasons for
them, with citations to the authorities and parts of the record on which the appellant
relies”); Anderson v. Hardman, 241 F.3d 544, 545 (7th Cir. 2001). Although we are mindful
that Williams is representing himself on appeal, it is not our role to craft parties’
arguments for them, and even self-represented parties must comply with Rule 28(a). See
Atkins v. Gilbert, 52 F.4th 359, 361 (7th Cir. 2022).
DISMISSED

-- 2 of 2 --