contract between Luray and CGS was never truly cancelled, and that Lu-ray fabricated this story to justify the termination of his employment (calling it. a "premeditated conspiracy”). (Cómpl, at 6.) Tillman attaches and references a statement from Keisha Cockrell, a CGS employee, which he claims corroborates this account. (Feb. 26, 2014, Ltr. (Revised Request for Summ. J. (Dkt. 35), Ex. D (Dkt. 35-1)) at ECF page 15.) However, Cockrell’s statement does not. create a genuine issue of material fact. The statement is unsworn and from a source with no apparent personah knowledge of the contract negotiations. In general, unsworn letters carry little to no weight as evidence in opposition to a motion -for summary judgment. See Hill v. Rayboy-Brauestein, 467 F.Supp.2d 336, 361 (S.D.N.Y.2006) (<HOLDING>); see also United States v. Jude Hotel Corp.,
holding that a signed but unsworn letter which is not otherwise authenticated is hearsay and should not be considered as evidence in opposition to a motion for summary judgment holding that hearsay in affidavit which would be inadmissible in evidence at trial could not be considered on motion for summary judgment holding that unsworn statements may not be considered on a motion for summary judgment holding that an unsworn letter is not proper summary judgment proof holding that hearsay statement did not constitute competent evidence and thus could not be considered in opposition to motion for summary judgment