
    David BROOKSHIRE, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. C.F. SAUER COMPANY, Defendant-Appellee.
    No. 02-2354.
    United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.
    Submitted May 8, 2003.
    Decided May 27, 2003.
    John P. Mann, Jr., Mann Law Firm, L.L.C., Greenville, South Carolina, for Appellant. Douglas M. Nabhan, Williams Mullen, Richmond, Virginia, for Appellee.
    Before WILKINSON and GREGORY, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge.
   Affirmed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.

PER CURIAM:

David Brookshire appeals the district court’s order, accepting the recommendation of the magistrate judge, and granting summary judgment to C.F. Sauer Company in his Family Medical Leave Act (“FMLA”) action. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm on the reasoning of the district court. See Brookshire v. C.F. Sauer Co., No. CA-01-3833 (D.S.C. Oct. 24, 2002). To the extent that Brookshire alleges on appeal that he qualified for FMLA leave on the grounds of a “chronic serious health condition” under 29 C.F.R. § 825.114(a)(2)(iii) (2003), we decline to consider the argument because he failed to raise this issue in opposition to Sauer’s motion for summary judgment. “ ‘If a party fails to assert a legal reason why summary judgment should not be granted, that ground is waived and cannot be considered or raised on appeal.’ ” Grenier v. Cyanamid Plastics, Inc., 70 F.3d 667, 678 (1st Cir.1995) (quoting Vaughner v. Pulito, 804 F.2d 873, 877 n. 2 (5th Cir.1986)). We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before the court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

AFFIRMED.  