Dione Thomas v. Sotera Defense Solutions, Inc., No. 16-1860 (4th Cir. 2017)

Annotate this Case

Download PDF

UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 16-1860 DIONE M. THOMAS, Plaintiff – Appellant, v. SOTERA DEFENSE SOLUTION, INC.; SOTERA DEFENSE INC.; JACOBS FEDERAL NETWORK SYSTEMS LLC, SOLUTIONS, Defendants – Appellees, and FNS JACOBS; KENUANA ENGRAM; PATRICIA SHEA; VERNON SAUNDERS; DEBORAH DRAKE, Defendants. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Alexandria. Claude M. Hilton, Senior District Judge. (1:15-cv-00596-CMH-MSN) Submitted: January 31, 2017 Before SHEDD and Circuit Judge. DUNCAN, Decided: Circuit Judges, February 14, 2017 and DAVIS, Senior Affirmed in part; affirmed in part as modified by unpublished per curiam opinion. Dione M. Thomas, Appellant Pro Se. Lorraine Thompson, FORD HARRISON Anessa Abrams, Jacquelyn LLP, Washington, D.C.; Christopher Eric Humber, OGLETREE DEAKINS NASH SMOAK & STEWART, PC, Washington, D.C., for Appellees. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. 2 PER CURIAM: Dione granting M. Thomas defendants’ appeals motions the to district dismiss her court’s orders second amended complaint in this employment discrimination action. reviewed the record and find no reversible error. We have Accordingly, we affirm the dismissal of count I for the reasons stated by the district court. We likewise affirm the dismissal of count II, but to as modified prejudice. Thomas reflect v. dismissal Sotera Defense of that count Solutions, without Inc., No. 1:15-cv-00596-CMH-MSN (E.D. Va. filed July 19, 2016 & entered July 20, 2016; July 27, 2016). We grant leave to proceed in forma pauperis and 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 IN PART; AFFIRMED IN PART AS MODIFIED 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.