Filed: Mar. 15, 2017
Latest Update: Mar. 03, 2020
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 16-2053 LINDA L. WAGNER, Plaintiff - Appellant, v. LINDAWAGNER.COM, an Internet domain name, Defendant - Appellee. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Alexandria. Leonie M. Brinkema, District Judge. (1:16-cv-00053-LMB-IDD) Submitted: February 28, 2017 Decided: March 15, 2017 Before DUNCAN and KEENAN, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge. Affirmed by unpublished pe
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 16-2053 LINDA L. WAGNER, Plaintiff - Appellant, v. LINDAWAGNER.COM, an Internet domain name, Defendant - Appellee. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Alexandria. Leonie M. Brinkema, District Judge. (1:16-cv-00053-LMB-IDD) Submitted: February 28, 2017 Decided: March 15, 2017 Before DUNCAN and KEENAN, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge. Affirmed by unpublished per..
More
UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 16-2053
LINDA L. WAGNER,
Plaintiff - Appellant,
v.
LINDAWAGNER.COM, an Internet domain name,
Defendant - Appellee.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern
District of Virginia, at Alexandria. Leonie M. Brinkema,
District Judge. (1:16-cv-00053-LMB-IDD)
Submitted: February 28, 2017 Decided: March 15, 2017
Before DUNCAN and KEENAN, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior
Circuit Judge.
Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Linda L. Wagner, Appellant Pro Se. Attison Leonard Barnes, III,
Ari Scott Meltzer, David Edison Weslow, WILEY REIN, LLP,
Washington, D.C., for Appellee.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
PER CURIAM:
Linda L. Wagner appeals the district court’s orders
granting summary judgment in favor of the Internet domain name
Lindawagner.com and denying reconsideration in Wagner’s in rem
action under the Anticybersquatting Consumer Protection Act, 15
U.S.C. § 1125(d) (2012). We have reviewed the record and the
parties’ arguments and find no reversible error. Accordingly,
we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court.
Wagner v. Lindawagner.com, No. 1:16-cv-00053-LMB-IDD (E.D. Va.
Aug. 15, 2016; Aug. 19, 2016). We dispense with oral argument
because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented
in the materials before this court and argument would not aid
the decisional process.
AFFIRMED
2