Carey v. United Parcel ( 1999 )


Menu:
  •                                                                          F I L E D
    United States Court of Appeals
    Tenth Circuit
    UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
    AUG 25 1999
    FOR THE TENTH CIRCUIT
    PATRICK FISHER
    Clerk
    JESSIE CAREY,
    Plaintiff-Appellant,
    v.                                                  No. 98-1442
    (D.C. No. 97-S-644)
    UNITED PARCEL SERVICE,                               (D. Colo.)
    Defendant-Appellee.
    ORDER AND JUDGMENT *
    Before TACHA, McKAY, and MURPHY, Circuit Judges.
    After examining the briefs and appellate record, this panel has determined
    unanimously that oral argument would not materially assist the determination
    of this appeal. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2); 10th Cir. R. 34.1(G). The case is
    therefore ordered submitted without oral argument.
    *
    This order and judgment is not binding precedent, except under the
    doctrines of law of the case, res judicata, and collateral estoppel. The court
    generally disfavors the citation of orders and judgments; nevertheless, an order
    and judgment may be cited under the terms and conditions of 10th Cir. R. 36.3.
    Plaintiff Jessie Carey, appearing pro se, appeals from the district court’s
    grant of summary judgment in favor of defendant United Parcel Service in this
    action filed under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, 42 U.S.C. §§ 2000e
    to 2000e-17. On appeal, plaintiff challenges the district court’s decision only
    insofar as it dismissed her claim that UPS temporarily laid her off from her
    position in its Collections Department in February 1992 in retaliation for filing a
    complaint with the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission in 1991. We
    exercise jurisdiction under 
    28 U.S.C. § 1291
    .
    The district court held that plaintiff had not followed the procedures set
    forth in 42 U.S.C. § 2000e-5(e), and her retaliation claim was time-barred.
    Plaintiff argues on appeal that her retaliation claim had merit. Plaintiff’s
    argument is unavailing. We have carefully reviewed the briefs and the record on
    appeal. We find that the appeal is frivolous, and deny plaintiff’s motion for
    leave to proceed in forma pauperis for substantially the same reasons as those set
    forth in the district court’s October 28, 1998 order.
    The appeal is DISMISSED. The mandate shall issue forthwith.
    Entered for the Court
    Deanell Reece Tacha
    Circuit Judge
    -2-
    

Document Info

Docket Number: 98-1442

Filed Date: 8/25/1999

Precedential Status: Non-Precedential

Modified Date: 4/18/2021