Anthony FALSO, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. SALZMAN GROUP, INC., Defendant-Appellee, 327 F. App'x 303

SUMMARY ORDER Appellant Anthony Falso appeals from district court’s grant of

summary judgment to the defendants in Appellant’s action claiming violations of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 (“Title VII”), 42 U.S.C. § 2000e et seq., and the Americans with Disabilities Act (“ADA”). Appellees argue that the district court correctly granted the motion for

summary judgment. We assume the parties’ familiarity with the facts, proceedings below, and specification of appellate issues and hold as follows. We review a district court’s grant of

summary judgment de novo, and ask whether the district court properly concluded that there were no genuine issues of 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, a court is “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). However, “conclusory statements or mere allegations [are] not sufficient to defeat a

summary judgment motion.” Davis v. New York, 316 F.3d 93, 100 (2d Cir.2002). Having conducted an independent and de novo review, we affirm for substantially the same reasons stated by the district court in its thorough and well-reasoned order. We have considered all of Appellant’s arguments on appeal and find them to be without merit. For the foregoing reasons, the judgment of the district court is AFFIRMED.