UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE TENTH CIRCUIT

HERMON STATEN,

Plaintiff-Appellant,

v.

MIDWEST CONSTRUCTION COMPANY; PAYLESS SHOESOURCE, INC.; STORMONT-VAIL INC.; STORMONT-VAIL HEALTH CARE, INC.,

Defendants-Appellees,

and

CLARKSON CONSTRUCTION COMPANY, INC.,

Defendant.

No. 02-3425

(D.C. No. 02-CV-4082-JAR)

(D. Kan.)

ORDER AND JUDGMENT*

Before SEYMOUR, BRISCOE, and LUCERO, Circuit Judges.

After examining the briefs and appellate record, this panel has determined unanimously that oral argument would not materially assist the determination of this appeal. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2); 10th Cir. R. 34.1(G). The case is therefore ordered submitted without oral argument.

Plaintiff-appellant Hermon Staten appeals pro se the dismissal of his discrimination and harassment claims against his former employers (defendants Midwest Construction Company and Payless ShoeSource, Inc.) and against medical providers (defendants Stormont-Vail Inc. and Stormont-Vail HealthCare, Inc.), under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act, 42 U.S.C. §§ 2000e to 2000e-17, and the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA), 42 U.S.C. §§ 12101-12213. We exercise jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291 and affirm.1

Mr. Staten alleges that the employer-defendants treated him unfairly and forced him to undergo an MRI or CT scan, performed by Stormont-Vail HealthCare, Inc. During the unwanted medical procedure, metal particles were allegedly embedded in his brain, resulting in further harassment and loss of privacy. The district court dismissed Mr. Staten's federal employment claims for failure to exhaust administrative remedies by filing a charge with the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC). See Simms v. Okla. ex rel. Dep't of Mental Health & Substance Abuse Servs., 165 F.3d 1321, 1326 (10th Cir. 1999) (stating the general requirement that a claimant must exhaust his administrative remedies before pursuing a Title VII claim in federal court); McBride v. CITGO Petroleum Corp., 281 F.3d 1099, 1105 (10th Cir. 2002) (discussing the parallel requirement under the ADA). Mr. Staten's state claims of harassment and medical malpractice were dismissed for failure to show diversity of citizenship. See 28 U.S.C. § 1332 (requiring diversity of citizenship among parties).

We review the district court's dismissal of Mr. Staten's claims de novo, Sutton v. Utah State Sch. for Deaf & Blind, 173 F.3d 1226, 1236 (10th Cir. 1999), construing his pro se filings liberally, see Haines v. Kerner, 404 U.S. 519, 520-21 (1972). After carefully reviewing the record on appeal, we AFFIRM the district court's dismissal for substantially the reasons stated in its Order of November 4, 2002. Defendant Clarkson Construction Company's motion to dismiss is DENIED as moot. Mr. Staten's motion to correct caption is GRANTED; all his other motions are DENIED. The mandate shall issue forthwith.

Entered for the Court

Stephanie K. Seymour

Circuit Judge