Homi Amirmokri v. Department of Energy, No. 09-1692 (4th Cir. 2010)
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 09-1692 HOMI N. AMIRMOKRI, Plaintiff - Appellant, v. DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY, Secretary, Defendant - Appellee. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Maryland, at Greenbelt. Alexander Williams, Jr., District Judge. (8:08-cv-00994-AW) Submitted: June 30, 2010 Decided: July 14, 2010 Before GREGORY and SHEDD, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Morris E. Fischer, LAW OFFICE OF MORRIS FISCHER, Bethesda, Maryland, for Appellant. Rod J. Rosenstein, United States Attorney, Allen F. Loucks, Assistant United States Attorney, Baltimore, Maryland, for Appellee. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. PER CURIAM: Homi N. Amirmokri, a male of Iranian origin, appeals from the district court s adverse grant of summary judgment and dismissal of his action alleging that his employer, the Department of Energy, discriminated and retaliated against him in violation of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, as amended, 42 U.S.C.A. ยงยง 2000e to 2000e-17 (West 2003 & Supp. 2010), allegedly based upon his race and prior Equal Employment Opportunity Amirmokri and whistleblowing alleges retaliated on against appeal relative activity. that to he his was Specifically, discriminated forced removal, and paid administrative leave, and notice of reprimand after a verbal altercation with a co-worker. Our review of the record and the district court s opinion discloses that this appeal is without merit. Finding no error, we affirm. This court reviews de novo a district court s order granting summary judgment and views the facts in the light most favorable to the nonmoving party. 556 F.3d 165, 167 (4th Cir. Rowzie v. Allstate Ins. Co., 2009). Summary judgment is appropriate when no genuine issue of material fact exists and the moving party is entitled to judgment as a matter of law. Fed. R. unless Civ. a P. 56(c)(2). reasonable jury Summary could judgment return nonmoving party on the evidence presented. 2 a will be verdict granted for the Anderson v. Liberty Lobby, Inc., 477 U.S. 242, 248 (1986). district court correctly determined We conclude that the that Amirmokri failed to establish a prima facie case of retaliation and that he did not demonstrate that the employer s legitimate, non-discriminatory reason for the disciplinary action was a pretext for national origin discrimination. See McDonnell Douglas Corp. v. Green, 411 U.S. 792, 802-04 (1973); James v. Booz-Allen & Hamilton, Inc., 368 F.3d 371, 375 (4th Cir. 2004); King v. Rumsfeld, 328 F.3d 145, 150-51 (4th Cir. 2003). We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal before contentions the court are adequately and argument presented would not in aid the the materials decisional process. AFFIRMED 3
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
