Khaldoun KHATTAB, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. MOREHOUSE SCHOOL OF MEDICINE, Defendant-Appellee, 404 F. App'x 374

PER CURIAM: In July 2004, Dr. Khaldoun Khattab began an internal medicine residency at Morehouse School of Medicine (“More-house”) for the academic year, 2004-2005. In June 2005, Morehouse decided not to renew his residency for the 2005-2006 academic year and therefore terminated his residency. Morehouse did so because it found serious deficiencies in Dr. Khattab’s performance. In July 2006, Dr.

Khattab brought this action against Morehouse claiming that, in violation of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, Morehouse discriminated against him on the basis of his race, color, national origin, and religion through discriminatory work assignments, by harassing him in the work place, and in terminating his residency. He claimed that such discrimination continued after the termination in that Morehouse provided one or more other institutions with negative information that precluded him from finding another job in medicine.

He also claimed that Morehouse slandered and defamed him in violation of state law. Morehouse denied liability and following discovery moved the district court for

summary judgment. The court referred the motion to a magistrate judge who, on July 14, 2009, issued a Report and Recommendation (“R & R”) recommending that the district court grant the motion. Dr. Khattab objected to the R & R. The district court overruled his objections, received the R & R with approval, and adopted it as the opinion of the court. Dr. Khattab now appeals. We have carefully considered the magistrate judge’s R & R in light of Dr. Khattab’s arguments for reversal. We find that the magistrate judge’s comprehensive R & R of some 43 pages properly analyzed and disposed of Dr.

Khattab’s claims, and therefore affirm the district court on the basis of the magistrate judge’s analysis. AFFIRMED. . Dr. Khattab is Caucasian, a native of Syria, and a Muslim. . In addition to challenging the district court's decision granting

summary judgment, Dr. Khattab argues that the magistrate judge and the district court abused their discretion in striking his response to Morehouse’s motion for

summary judgment for failing to comply with the court's local rules, and that the magistrate judge and the district court abused their discretion in not extending the time for the filing of his response to Morehouse’s motion. We find no abuse of discretion.