Talin Tasciyan v. Medical Numerics, No. 13-1550 (4th Cir. 2013)

Annotate this Case

Download PDF

UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 13-1550 TALIN A. TASCIYAN, Plaintiff - Appellant, v. MEDICAL NUMERICS; SYSTEMS, TEXTRON SYSTEMS; OVERWATCH GEOSPATIAL Defendants - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Maryland, at Greenbelt. Charles B. Day, Magistrate Judge. (8:11-cv-01467-CBD) Submitted: October 28, 2013 Decided: November 6, 2013 Before GREGORY, SHEDD, and KEENAN, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Talin A. Tasciyan, Appellant Pro Se. Kenneth Christopher Gauvey, TAYLOR & RYAN, LLC, Baltimore, Maryland; Donald James Walsh, OFFIT KURMAN, PA, Owings Mills, Maryland, for Appellees. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. PER CURIAM: Talin A. Tasciyan brought suit against Defendants asserting gender discrimination and retaliation, in violation of Title VII of district the Civil court Rights ultimately Act of 1964. dismissed Although Tasciyan s the gender discrimination claim, the case proceeded to trial on Tasciyan s retaliation Defendants. (1) claim. * jury returned defined instructed adverse the jury action verdict Defendants improper for regarding allowed impermissible hearsay evidence. the a for the On appeal, Tasciyan contends the magistrate judge improperly improperly The reference to the damages; jury; (2) and (3) Tasciyan also argues gender discrimination during closing argument was prejudicial and misled the jury. Having reviewed the transcript of the jury trial in light of the parties arguments on appeal, we find no reversible error. We Accordingly, we affirm the magistrate judge s judgment. dispense contentions with are oral argument adequately because presented in the facts and the materials legal before this court and argument would not aid the decisional process. AFFIRMED * judge. The parties consented to 28 U.S.C. § 363 (2006). 2 a trial before a magistrate

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.