
    Kim L. ALLEN-PLOWDEN, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. NATIONAL HEALTHCARE OF SUMTER; Carol Brown, Defendants-Appellees, and Brenda Flanagan; Jeanie S. Crotts, Defendants.
    No. 08-1760.
    United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.
    Submitted: Dec. 11, 2008.
    Decided: Dec. 15, 2008.
    Kim L. Allen-Plowden, Appellant Pro Se. Jeffrey Andrew Lehrer, Ford & Harrison, LLP, Spartanburg, South Carolina, for Appellees.
    Before NIEMEYER, DUNCAN, and AGEE, Circuit Judges.
    Affirmed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.
    Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
   PER CURIAM:

Kim L. Allen-Plowden appeals the district court’s order accepting the recommendation of the magistrate judge and granting summary judgment in favor of her former employer and dismissing her complaint alleging employment discrimination and defamation. This court reviews a district court’s order granting summary judgment de novo, drawing reasonable inferences in the light most favorable to the non-moving party. Doe v. Kidd, 501 F.3d 348, 353 (4th Cir.2007), cert. denied, — U.S. —, 128 S.Ct. 1483, 170 L.Ed.2d 297 (2008). Summary judgment is proper “if the pleadings, the discovery and disclosure materials on file, and any affidavits show that there is no genuine issue as to any material fact and that the movant is entitled to judgment as a matter of law.” Fed.R.Civ.P. 56(c); see Celotex Corp. v. Catrett, 477 U.S. 317, 322, 106 S.Ct. 2548, 91 L.Ed.2d 265 (1986). We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. Allen-Plow-den v. Nat’l Healthcare of Sumter, No. 3:07-ev-00420-JFA, 2008 WL 2330215 (D.S.C. June 4, 2008). 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.  