Connell Dones v. Megan Brennan , 673 F. App'x 333 ( 2017 )

UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 16-2063
CONNELL DONES,
Plaintiff – Appellant,
v.
MEGAN J. BRENNAN,
Defendant - Appellee.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of
Maryland, at Greenbelt. Deborah K. Chasanow, Senior District
Judge. (8:12-cv-03369-DKC)
Submitted: January 17, 2017 Decided: January 19, 2017
Before NIEMEYER, TRAXLER, and KING, Circuit Judges.
Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Connell Dones, Appellant Pro Se. Tarra DeShields Minnis, OFFICE
OF THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Baltimore, Maryland, for
Appellee.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
PER CURIAM:
Connell Dones appeals the verdict entered in favor of the
defendant with respect to Dones’ employment discrimination
complaint. Giving liberal interpretation to Dones’ informal
appellate brief, Erickson v. Pardus, 551 U.S. 89, 94 (2007) (per
curiam), he does not contest the district court’s orders
granting in part defendant’s motion to dismiss and granting in
part defendant’s motion for summary judgment. See 4th Cir. R.
42(b). Instead, Dones only challenges the sufficiency of the
evidence supporting the jury’s verdict on one claim. Because
Dones failed to file either a Fed. R. Civ. P. 50 or 59(a) motion
within 28 days of the judgment, any challenge to the sufficiency
of the evidence is foreclosed. See Belk, Inc. v. Meyer Corp.,
U.S., 679 F.3d 146, 154-60 (4th Cir. 2012) (noting that
postverdict motion challenging jury’s verdict as to sufficiency
of evidence is necessary to preserve issue for appeal).
Accordingly, we affirm the district court’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
2