UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 09-2101
KAREN AMAYA,
Plaintiff – Appellant,
v.
PRINCE GEORGE’S COUNTY, MARYLAND; PRINCE GEORGE’S COUNTY
POLICE DEPARTMENT,
Defendants – Appellees.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of
Maryland, at Greenbelt. Alexander Williams, Jr., District
Judge. (8:08-cv-00443-AW)
Submitted: October 7, 2010 Decided: February 22, 2011
Before WILKINSON, MOTZ, and GREGORY, Circuit Judges.
Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Karen Amaya, Appellant Pro Se. Brennan Christopher McCarthy,
Associate County Attorney, Upper Marlboro, Maryland, for
Appellees.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
PER CURIAM:
Karen Amaya seeks to appeal the district court’s order
granting Defendants’ summary judgment motion on her
discrimination and retaliation claims, brought pursuant to Title
VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, as amended, 42 U.S.C.A.
§§ 2000e to 2000e-17 (West 2003 & Supp. 2010). The record does
not contain a transcript of the summary judgment proceedings.
An appellant has the burden of including in the record on appeal
a transcript of all parts of the proceedings material to the
issues raised on appeal. See Fed. R. App. P. 10(b); 4th Cir. R.
10(b). An appellant proceeding on appeal in forma pauperis is
entitled to transcripts at government expense only in certain
circumstances. 28 U.S.C. § 753(f) (2006). By failing to
produce a transcript or to qualify for the production of a
transcript at government expense, Amaya has waived review of the
issues on appeal that depend upon the transcript to show error.
See Powell v. Estelle, 959 F.2d 22, 26 (5th Cir. 1992);
Keller v. Prince George’s Cnty., 827 F.2d 952, 954 n.1 (4th Cir.
1987). As no error appears on the record before us, we affirm
the district court’s order. 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
2