Talin Tasciyan v. Medical Numerics , 545 F. App'x 257 ( 2013 )


Menu:
  •                             UNPUBLISHED
    UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
    FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
    No. 13-1550
    TALIN A. TASCIYAN,
    Plaintiff - Appellant,
    v.
    MEDICAL NUMERICS;    TEXTRON    SYSTEMS;   OVERWATCH    GEOSPATIAL
    SYSTEMS,
    Defendants - Appellees.
    Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of
    Maryland, at Greenbelt.     Charles B. Day, Magistrate Judge.
    (8:11-cv-01467-CBD)
    Submitted:   October 28, 2013              Decided:    November 6, 2013
    Before GREGORY, SHEDD, and KEENAN, Circuit Judges.
    Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
    Talin A. Tasciyan, Appellant Pro Se.         Kenneth Christopher
    Gauvey, TAYLOR & RYAN, LLC, Baltimore, Maryland; Donald James
    Walsh, OFFIT KURMAN, PA, Owings Mills, Maryland, for Appellees.
    Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
    PER CURIAM:
    Talin    A.    Tasciyan       brought        suit       against     Defendants
    asserting gender discrimination and retaliation, in violation of
    Title       VII    of     the   Civil        Rights    Act    of     1964.      Although      the
    district           court        ultimately            dismissed        Tasciyan’s           gender
    discrimination claim, the case proceeded to trial on Tasciyan’s
    retaliation          claim. *          The    jury     returned       a     verdict    for     the
    Defendants.             On appeal, Tasciyan contends the magistrate judge
    (1)     improperly         defined       “adverse       action”        for    the     jury;    (2)
    improperly          instructed         the     jury     regarding          damages;    and     (3)
    allowed impermissible hearsay evidence.                              Tasciyan also argues
    the     Defendants’         improper         reference        to     gender    discrimination
    during closing argument was prejudicial and misled the jury.
    Having reviewed the transcript of the jury trial in
    light of the parties’ arguments on appeal, we find no reversible
    error.       Accordingly, we affirm the magistrate judge’s judgment.
    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
    *
    The parties consented to                   a     trial    before     a    magistrate
    judge.       
    28 U.S.C. § 363
     (2006).
    2
    

Document Info

Docket Number: 13-1550

Citation Numbers: 545 F. App'x 257

Judges: Gregory, Keenan, Per Curiam, Shedd

Filed Date: 11/6/2013

Precedential Status: Non-Precedential

Modified Date: 8/31/2023