Thomas Lamont Saxon appeals the district court’s order granting summary judgment to the Defendant in his employment discrimination action. Regarding Saxon’s claims on appeal that the district court erred by denying his claims of discrimination for the 1996 and 1998 positions and that an employee wrongfully interfered with the administrative processing of his informal discrimination complaint, we affirm on the reasoning of the district court. See Saxon v. Shalala, No. CA-00-896PJM (D.Md. filed Aug. 23, 2000; entered Aug. 25, 2000).

Saxon’s remaining claim, that the district court erred by failing to hold a hearing on Defendant’s motion for summary judgment, also fails. Cray Communications Inc. v. Novatel Computer Sys., Inc., 33 F.3d 390, 396 (4th Cir. 1994) (holding that district court does not need to hold a hearing on a summary judgment motion). 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.