UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 05-2323
ERIC M. BOYD,
Plaintiff - Appellant,
versus
CARLOS M. GUITERREZ,
Defendant - Appellee.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of
Maryland, at Greenbelt. Deborah K. Chasanow, District Judge. (CA-
04-1535-DKC)
Submitted: November 21, 2006 Decided: January 23, 2007
Before TRAXLER and DUNCAN, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior
Circuit Judge.
Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Willie J. Mahone, Frederick, Maryland, for Appellant. Rod J.
Rosenstein, United States Attorney, Ariana Wright Arnold, Assistant
United States Attorney, Baltimore, Maryland, for Appellee.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
PER CURIAM:
Eric M. Boyd appeals the district court’s adverse grant
of summary judgment, alleging abuse of the district court’s
discretion in denying his Fed. R. Civ. P. 56(f) motion. Generally,
summary judgment is appropriate only after adequate time for
discovery. Evans v. Technologies Applications & Serv. Co., 80 F.3d
954, 961 (4th Cir. 1996) (citation and quotation marks omitted).
Here, however, while Boyd submitted an affidavit pursuant to Rule
56(f) in which he attested that he was “unable to present facts in
opposition to Defendant’s Motion for Summary Judgment, without the
benefit of discovery in this matter,” he failed to identify any
facts essential to his opposition that were not already available
to him. Rule 56(f) provides that a court may order a continuance
“[s]hould it appear from the affidavits . . . that the party cannot
for reasons stated” present facts to defeat summary judgment.
Given the extent to which numerous documents and affidavits
submitted during his EEOC proceedings were already available to
Boyd, we find no abuse of the district court’s discretion in
denying Boyd’s Rule 56(f) motion.
Accordingly, we affirm the district court’s order denying
Boyd’s Rule 56(f) motion, granting summary judgment, and dismissing
Boyd’s action. We dispense with oral argument because the facts
- 2 -
and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials
before the court and argument would not aid the decisional process.
AFFIRMED
- 3 -