Reginald Cobbins v. Engineered Plastic Components , 426 F. App'x 477 ( 2011 )


Menu:
  •                    United States Court of Appeals
    FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT
    ___________
    No. 11-1321
    ___________
    Reginald L. Cobbins,                 *
    *
    Appellant,               *
    * Appeal from the United States.
    v.                             * District Court for the
    * Western District of Missouri.
    Engineered Plastic Components,       *
    * [UNPUBLISHED]
    Appellee,                *
    *
    Dave Arnold; John Johnson; Chuck     *
    Aust; Glenda Shackelford; Randy      *
    Nelson; Chris Ross,                  *
    *
    Defendants.              *
    ___________
    Submitted: August 23, 2011
    Filed: August 29, 2011
    ___________
    Before MURPHY, ARNOLD and BENTON, Circuit Judges.
    ___________
    PER CURIAM.
    Reginald Cobbins appeals following the district court’s1 adverse grant of
    summary judgment in his employment-discrimination action.
    1
    The Honorable Nanette K. Laughery, United States District Judge for the
    Western District of Missouri.
    Engineered Plastic Components has moved to dismiss this appeal based on the
    form of Cobbins’s brief on appeal, and this court denies the motion.
    After careful de novo review of the merits of the appeal, see Anderson v.
    Larson, 
    327 F.3d 762
    , 767 (8th Cir. 2003), this court affirms. Cobbins’s
    discrimination and retaliation claims fail because the undisputed evidence showed he
    did not suffer an adverse employment action, see Gilbert v. Des Moines Area Cmty.
    Coll., 
    495 F.3d 906
    , 917 (8th Cir. 2007), Phillip v. Ford Motor Co., 
    413 F.3d 766
    , 768
    (8th Cir. 2005). His hostile-work-environment claim fails, because the undisputed
    evidence showed, among other things, that EPC took appropriate remedial action, see
    Jenkins v. Winter, 
    540 F.3d 742
    , 749 (8th Cir. 2008). Cobbins’s remaining arguments
    are either not properly before us, or are meritless and do not need further discussion.
    This court affirms. See 8th Cir. R. 47B.
    _________________________________
    -2-
    

Document Info

Docket Number: 11-1321

Citation Numbers: 426 F. App'x 477

Judges: Arnold, Benton, Murphy, Per Curiam

Filed Date: 8/29/2011

Precedential Status: Non-Precedential

Modified Date: 8/5/2023