No. 07-3726-cv.United States Court of Appeals, Second Circuit.
November 19, 2009.
Appeal from an August 2, 2007 judgment of the United States District Court for the Eastern District of New York (Nina Gershon, Judge).
UPON CONSIDERATION WHEREOF, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED,ADJUDGED, AND DECREED that the judgment of the District Court is AFFIRMED.
Teresa Zerilli-Edelglass, Jackson, NJ, pro se.
Richard Schoolman and Gena Usenheimer, Office of the General Counsel, New York City Transit Authority, Brooklyn, NY, for Appellees.
Page 622
PRESENT: ROGER J. MINER, JOSÉ A. CABRANES, CHESTER J. STRAUB, Circuit Judges.
SUMMARY ORDER
Plaintiff-appellant Teresa Zerilli-Edelglass, pro se, appeals from an August 2, 2007, 2007 WL 2261652, judgment of the United States District Court for the Eastern District of New York entered after the District Court granted summary judgment to defendants-appellees. We assume the parties’ familiarity with the underlying facts, the procedural history of the case, and the issues raised on appeal.
We review the granting of a motion for summary judgment de novo and ask whether the district court properly concluded that there was no genuine issue as to any material fact and that the moving party was entitled to judgment as a matter of law. See Miller v. Wolpoff Abramson, L.L.P., 321 F.3d 292, 300 (2d Cir. 2003). In determining whether there are genuine issues of material fact, we are “required to resolve all ambiguities and draw all permissible factual inferences in favor of the party against whom summary judgment is sought.”Terry v. Ashcroft, 336 F.3d 128, 137 (2d Cir. 2003) (internal quotation marks omitted).
After reviewing the record and considering the issues raised on appeal, we conclude that summary judgment for defendants-appellees was appropriate for substantially the reasons set forth in the District Court’s thorough opinion. Accordingly, the August 2, 2007 judgment of the District Court is AFFIRMED.