Jermaine Staggers v. Robert Kennedy, Jr.

USCA4 Appeal: 24-1155 Doc: 38 Filed: 07/20/2026 Pg: 1 of 2

UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 24-1155

JERMAINE STAGGERS, Plaintiff – Appellant, v. ROBERT F. KENNEDY, JR., Secretary, U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Defendant – Appellee.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Maryland, at Baltimore.

Julie R. Rubin, District Judge. (1:21-cv-00231-JRR)

Submitted: May 28, 2026 Decided: July 20, 2026

Before AGEE, WILKINSON and NIEMEYER, Circuit Judges.

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

ON BRIEF: Jeffrey J. Sadri, ELLISON SADRI, LLC, Annapolis, Maryland, for Appellant. Erek L. Barron, United States Attorney, Kimberly S. Phillips, OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Baltimore, Maryland, for Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

USCA4 Appeal: 24-1155 Doc: 38 Filed: 07/20/2026 Pg: 2 of 2

PER CURIAM: In 2021, Jermaine Staggers filed a complaint against his employer, the United States Department of Health and Human Services (“HHS”), alleging gender discrimination and retaliation, in violation of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, 42 U.S.C. § 2000e et seq. The district court granted the Government’s motion to dismiss Staggers’ gender discrimination claim, but his claim for retaliation survived. Discovery ensued, at the close of which the Government moved for summary judgment as to the retaliation claim. The district court granted that motion and dismissed Staggers’ retaliation claim. Staggers appeals that dismissal, arguing that material disputes exist such that summary judgment was inappropriate.

Mindful that the Court may affirm for any ground apparent from the record, Columbia Gas Transmission, LLC v. RDFS, LLC, 148 F.4th 163, 169 (4th Cir. 2025), we have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm the district court’s judgment. We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before this court and argument would not aid in the decisional process.

AFFIRMED