Rena Ramnarine v. Rainbow Child Development Ctr, No. 18-1985 (4th Cir. 2019)

Annotate this Case

Download PDF

UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 18-1985 RENA ANNE RAMNARINE, Plaintiff - Appellant, v. RAINBOW CHILD DEVELOPMENT CENTER, INC.; RAINBOW ACADEMY, INC.; KIM T. MITCHELL, LLC; KIM TERESE MITCHELL, Defendants - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Maryland, at Greenbelt. Roger W. Titus, Senior District Judge. (8:17-cv-02262-RWT) Submitted: September 30, 2019 Decided: November 6, 2019 Before WILKINSON, NIEMEYER, and AGEE, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Omar Vincent Melehy, Andrew Balashov, MELEHY & ASSOCIATES LLC, Silver Spring, Maryland, for Appellant. David A. Branch, LAW OFFICE OF DAVID A. BRANCH & ASSOCIATES, PLLC, Washington, D.C., for Appellees. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. PER CURIAM: Rena Anne Ramnarine appeals the district court’s order granting summary judgment to Defendants on her claims under the antiretaliation provision of the Fair Labor Standards Act, 29 U.S.C. § 215(a)(3) (2012). The district court noted that Ramnarine hedged as to whether she could teach for the entirety of the upcoming school year and concluded that Ramnarine had not established that her protected activity caused her termination or that Defendants’ proffered reason was pretextual. See Ray v. Int’l Paper Co., 909 F.3d 661, 669 (4th Cir. 2018) (providing standard); Darveau v. Detecon, Inc., 515 F.3d 334, 340, 342-43 (4th Cir. 2008) (same). We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. Ramnarine v. Rainbow Child Dev. Ctr., No. 8:17-cv-02262-RWT (D. Md. July 26, 2018). We 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 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.