ARGUMENT AND CITATIONS OF AUTHORITY

I THIS COURT SHOULD AFFIRM THE DISTRICT COURT’S ORDER AND JUDGEMENT BECAUSE THE APPELLANT FAILED TO SHOW THAT THERE WAS A GENIUINE DISPUTE AS TO ANY MATERIAL FACT THEREFORE FARM TOWN MORTGAGE IS ENTITLED TO JUDGEMENT AS A MATTER OF LAW. TITLE VII OF THE CIVIL RIGHTS ACT OF 1964 DOES NOT INCLUDE TRANSSEXUALS AS A PROTECTED CLASS FROM DISCRIMNATION IN THE WORK PLACE THUS, THE APPELLANT’S APPEAL FOR SEX DISCRIMINATION SHOULD BE DISMISSED. The district court’s holding in Lopez v. Farmtown Mortgage Services (FMS) that Title VII of the 1964 Civil Rights Act does not protect transgendered or transsexuals was correct and should be affirmed on appeal. The district court’s grant of summary judgment to FMS demonstrated the plaintiff Veronica Lopez’s (VL) lack of sufficient evidence to prove that there was a genuine dispute as to any material fact for a Title VII discrimination claim. (R. 1.) This Court of Appeals reviews a district court’s grant of motion for summary judgment pursuant to federal rule 56(c) de novo. (R. 1.) According to Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964(Title VII), it shall be an unlawful employment practice for an employer to fail or refuse to hire or to discharge any individual, or otherwise to discriminate against any individual with respect to his compensation, terms, conditions, or privileges of employment, because of such individual's race, color, religion, sex, or national origin. 42 U.S.C.A. § 2000e-2(a)(1) (1964). The statute’s language does not include gender or sexual orientation it only includes race, color, religion, sex, or national origin as a protected classes from discrimination. Legislative history has illustrated how congress has refused to include transsexuals or sexual orientation in the Title VII statute. The legislative