Documenti di Didattica
Documenti di Professioni
Documenti di Cultura
No. 16-1523
JOSE SOTO,
Plaintiff, Appellant,
v.
Defendant, Appellee.
Before
him. Soto's claims arise from his unsuccessful filing for workers'
April 29, 2010, and from the subsequent termination of his USPS
order granting the USPS's motion, the court did not address Count
because the parties agreed that the count had dropped from the
case. The court then dismissed Count II, which alleged race
- 2 -
remedies. Soto had not raised the claim in either of the two EEO
of Title VII, the district court found that the claim was meritless
counseling (on May 28, 2010) took place after the alleged failure
terminating Soto.
the district court treated the USPS's motion as one for Rule
parties agreed before the district court that Count I had dropped
- 3 -
affirm substantially on the district court's reasoning. See 1st
Cir. R. 27.0(c). Finally, Soto cannot make his due process claim
So ordered.
- 4 -