Sara Noshafagh v. Isiah Leggett, No. 13-1168 (4th Cir. 2013)

Annotate this Case

Download PDF

UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 13-1168 SARA NOSHAFAGH, Plaintiff Appellant, v. ISIAH LEGGETT, County Executive, Montgomery County, Maryland; MONTGOMERY COUNTY FIRE AND RESCUE SERVICE, Defendants Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Maryland, at Greenbelt. Deborah K. Chasanow, Chief District Judge. (8:11-cv-03038-DKC) Submitted: July 15, 2013 Decided: August 14, 2013 Before WILKINSON and KING, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. A. P. Pishevar, PISHEVAR & ASSOCIATES, P.C., Rockville, Maryland, for Appellant. Jo Anna Schmidt, Danielle E. Marone, SCHMIDT, DAILEY & O'NEILL, LLC, Baltimore, Maryland, for Appellees. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. PER CURIAM: Plaintiff Sara Noshafagh, an American citizen of Iranian origin who immigrated to the United States in 1997, initiated this action in the District of Maryland in 2011, alleging claims of national origin discrimination and retaliation in violation of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. In addition, Noshafagh sought to pursue a state law claim for invasion of privacy. On appeal, Noshafagh challenges the court s award of summary judgment in favor of the defendants. See Noshafagh v. Leggett, No. 8:11-cv-3038 (D. Md. Jan. 7, 2013), ECF No. 19. After a careful review of the various briefs, the appellate record, and the applicable legal principles, we are compelled to conclude that the district court did not err in awarding summary judgment to the defendants. We are therefore satisfied to affirm on the well-reasoned opinion of the district court, as filed on January 7, 2013. We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before our 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.