Cooley v. Tenet
This text of Cooley v. Tenet (Cooley v. Tenet) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Opinion
UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 05-1102
GLADYS C. COOLEY,
Plaintiff - Appellant,
versus
GEORGE TENET, Director, individually and in his capacity as Director (Retired) of the Central Intelligence Agency; JOHN MCLAUGHLIN, individually, and in his capacity as Acting Director of the Central Intelligence Agency; PORTER J. GOSS, individually and in his official capacity as Nominated Director of the Central Intelligence Agency; REGAN V. DANIELS, individually and in his capacity as investigator, Central Intelligence Agency; STANLEY M. MOSKOWITZ, Director of Congressional Affairs, Central Intelligence Agency; KATHRYN I. DYER, Information and Privacy Coordinator, Central Intelligence Agency; ELIZABETH YORK; JULIE LUND, EEO Director, Central Intelligence Agency,
Defendants - Appellees.
No. 05-1522
versus GEORGE TENET, Director, individually and in his capacity as Director (Retired) of the Central Intelligence Agency; JOHN MCLAUGHLIN, individually, and in his capacity as Acting Director of the Central Intelligence Agency; PORTER J. GOSS, individually and in his official capacity as Nominated Director of the Central Intelligence Agency; REGAN V. DANIELS, individually and in his capacity as investigator, Central Intelligence Agency; STANLEY M. MOSKOWITZ, Director of Congressional Affairs, Central Intelligence Agency; KATHRYN I. DYER, Information and Privacy Coordinator, Central Intelligence Agency; ELIZABETH YORK; JULIE LUND, EEO Director, Central Intelligence Agency,
Appeals from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Alexandria. Leonie M. Brinkema, District Judge. (CA-04-1052-1)
Submitted: July 11, 2005 Decided: August 5, 2005
Before WILKINSON, GREGORY, and SHEDD, Circuit Judges.
Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Gladys C. Cooley, Appellant Pro Se. Paul Joseph McNulty, United States Attorney, Kevin Jason Mikolashek, Brian Eugene Bentley, OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Alexandria, Virginia, for Appellees.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c).
- 2 - PER CURIAM:
In these consolidated appeals, Gladys C. Cooley appeals
the district court’s orders dismissing her Freedom of Information
Act and employment discrimination claims. We have reviewed the
record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for
the reasons stated by the district court. See Cooley v. Tenet, No.
CA-04-1052-1 (E.D. Va. Jan. 10, 2005; Mar. 16, 2005). We dispense
with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are
adequately presented in the materials before the court and argument
would not aid the decisional process.
AFFIRMED
- 3 -
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
Cooley v. Tenet, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/cooley-v-tenet-ca4-2005.