Clarence Jenkins, Jr. v. South Carolina Department of Employment Workforce ( 2022 )


Menu:
  •                                     UNPUBLISHED
    UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
    FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
    No. 21-2177
    CLARENCE B. JENKINS, JR.,
    Plaintiff - Appellant,
    v.
    SOUTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF EMPLOYMENT WORKFORCE;
    SOUTH CAROLINA HUMAN AFFAIRS COMMISSION; SOUTH CAROLINA
    OFFICE OF INSPECTOR GENERAL; SOUTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF
    ADMINISTRATION; OFFICE OF SOUTH CAROLINA GOVERNOR,
    Defendants - Appellees.
    Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina, at
    Columbia. Terry L. Wooten, Senior District Judge. (3:21-cv-01606-TLW)
    Submitted: January 20, 2022                                       Decided: January 24, 2022
    Before WILKINSON, DIAZ, and THACKER, Circuit Judges.
    Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
    Clarence B. Jenkins, Jr., Appellant Pro Se. Robert Hayne Hodges, III, Lillian Marshall
    Coleman Newton, GIGNILLIAT, SAVITZ & BETTIS LLP, Columbia, South Carolina,
    for Appellees.
    Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
    PER CURIAM:
    Clarence B. Jenkins, Jr., appeals the district court’s order accepting the
    recommendation of the magistrate judge and dismissing Jenkins’ civil complaint and the
    court’s text order denying Jenkins’ motion for reconsideration. We conclude that the
    district court correctly determined that Jenkins failed to properly exhaust his administrative
    remedies prior to filing his complaint under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, as
    amended, 42 U.S.C. §§ 2000e to 2000e-17. We also conclude that the district court judge
    and the magistrate judge did not abuse their discretion in denying Jenkins’ motion to
    recuse. Accordingly, we affirm the district court’s judgment. Jenkins v. S.C. Dep’t of Emp.
    Workforce, No. 3:21-cv-01606-TLW (D.S.C. Sept. 27 & Oct. 13, 2021). 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
    

Document Info

Docket Number: 21-2177

Filed Date: 1/24/2022

Precedential Status: Non-Precedential

Modified Date: 1/24/2022