Karen Amaya v. Prince George's County, No. 09-2101 (4th Cir. 2011)

Annotate this Case

Download PDF

UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 09-2101 KAREN AMAYA, Plaintiff Appellant, v. PRINCE GEORGE S COUNTY, POLICE DEPARTMENT, MARYLAND; PRINCE GEORGE S COUNTY Defendants Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Maryland, at Greenbelt. Alexander Williams, Jr., District Judge. (8:08-cv-00443-AW) Submitted: October 7, 2010 Decided: February 22, 2011 Before WILKINSON, MOTZ, and GREGORY, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Karen Amaya, Appellant Pro Se. Brennan Christopher McCarthy, Associate County Attorney, Upper Marlboro, Maryland, for Appellees. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. PER CURIAM: Karen Amaya seeks to appeal the district court s order granting Defendants summary judgment motion on her discrimination and retaliation claims, brought pursuant to Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, as amended, 42 U.S.C.A. §§ 2000e to 2000e-17 (West 2003 & Supp. 2010). The record does not contain a transcript of the summary judgment proceedings. An appellant has the burden of including in the record on appeal a transcript of all parts of the proceedings material to the issues raised on appeal. See Fed. R. App. P. 10(b); 4th Cir. R. 10(b). An appellant proceeding on appeal in forma pauperis is entitled to transcripts at government expense only in certain circumstances. produce a 28 transcript U.S.C. or § to 753(f) qualify (2006). for the By failing production of to a transcript at government expense, Amaya has waived review of the issues on appeal that depend upon the transcript to show error. See Powell v. Estelle, 959 F.2d 22, 26 (5th Cir. 1992); Keller v. Prince George s Cnty., 827 F.2d 952, 954 n.1 (4th Cir. 1987). the As no error appears on the record before us, we affirm district court s order. We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before the court and argument would not aid the decisional process. AFFIRMED 2

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.