NOT PRECEDENTIAL UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE THIRD CIRCUIT ___________ No. 01-1798 ___________ BEVERLY FOSTER, Appellant v. CRAWFORD & COMPANY, ELISE MAULDIN, and GEORGE SCHIFF ___________ On Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of New Jersey District Court Judge: The Honorable Katharine S. Hayden. (D.C. Civil Action No. 98-CV-5454) ___________ Submitted Under Third Circuit L.A.R. 34.1(a) January 8, 2002 Before: MANSMANN, RENDELL, and FUENTES, Circuit Judges (Opinion Filed: February 13, 2002) ________________________ MEMORANDUM OPINION ________________________ FUENTES, Circuit Judge: Plaintiff Beverly Foster filed this Title VII action against her former employer Crawford & Company and several Crawford & Company employees. After the individual defendants were dismissed, Crawford & Company moved for summary judgment. Crawford & Company argued that Foster's Title VII claim should be barred under the doctrine of claim preclusion because Foster raised a Title VII claim against Crawford & Company in a prior suit which was dismissed. The District Court granted Crawford & Company's motion for summary judgment, concluding that Foster's Title VII action was barred by claim preclusion, and dismissed Foster's complaint in its entirety. We have carefully considered Foster's arguments in this appeal. We hold that they lack merit. For the reasons substantially stated in Judge Hayden's thorough and well- reasoned opinion, we affirm the Judgment of the District Court. _____________________________ TO THE CLERK OF THE COURT: Kindly file the foregoing Opinion. /s/ Julio M. Fuentes Circuit Judge