Jesse Lowell Satterfield appeals the district court’s orders granting the Appellees’ motion for summary judgment and denying Satterfield’s Fed.R.Civ.P. 59(e) motions in this employment discrimination case. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. See Satterfield v. Chao, No. 1:03-cv-00165-IMK (N.D. W. Va. Apr. 25 and June 13, 2006). 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.