SUMMARY ORDER Plaintiff-Appellant Evelyn Gonzalez appeals from a decision of the district court granting
summary judgment to Defendants dismissing Gonzalez’s complaint. We assume the parties’ familiarity with the underlying facts of the case, procedural history, and issues on appeal. We review the 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. 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 resolve any 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). Despite this deference, a party against whom
summary judgment is sought cannot defeat a motion for
summary judgment merely through conclusory statements or allegations. See Davis v. State of New York, 316 F.3d 93, 100 (2d Cir.2002). Our review of the record confirms that the district court properly granted Defendants’ motion for
summary judgment, and we affirm for substantially the same reasons set out in the court’s thorough and well-reasoned opinion of March 31, 2008. We have considered all of Gonzalez’s remaining arguments and find them to be without merit. For the foregoing reasons, the judgment of the district court is AFFIRMED.