The AI workspace for legal professionals
- Legal research with access to more than 1 million sources
- Document automation
- Matter management
- Hosted in the EU and Switzerland
Try it free for 14 days (10 questions/day during trial)
The AI workspace for legal professionals
Try it free for 14 days (10 questions/day during trial)
11-1991•Robert B. Curington; Ashley Brooks v. Umg Recordings, Incorporated
11-1991Court of Appeals for the Fourth CircuitFeb 29, 2012
UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 11-1991
ROBERT B. CURINGTON; ASHLEY BROOKS,
Plaintiffs - Appellants,
v.
UMG RECORDINGS, INCORPORATED; ALMO MUSIC CORPORATION, d/b/a
Rondor Music International; JOE WHEELER; TEMPORAL SONGS,
LIMITED; LAURENCE MIZZEL; ALRUBY MUSIC CORPORATION; AMARU
ENTERTAINMENT COMPANY,
Defendants – Appellees.
No. 11-2413
ROBERT B. CURINGTON; ASHLEY BROOKS,
Plaintiffs - Appellants,
v.
UMG RECORDINGS, INCORPORATED; ALMO MUSIC CORPORATION, d/b/a
Rondor Music International; JOE WHEELER; TEMPORAL SONGS,
LIMITED; LAURENCE MIZZEL; ALRUBY MUSIC CORPORATION; AMARU
ENTERTAINMENT COMPANY,
Defendants - Appellees.
Appeals from the United States District Court for the Middle
District of North Carolina, at Greensboro. Catherine C. Eagles,
District Judge. (1:10-cv-00890-CCE-PTS)
-- 1 of 3 --
2
Submitted: February 27, 2012 Decided: February 29, 2012
Before WILKINSON, KEENAN, and WYNN, Circuit Judges.
Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Robert B. Curington, Ashley Brooks, Appellants Pro Se. Linda M.
Burrow, Alison Mackenzie, CALDWELL LESLIE & PROCTOR, P.C., Los
Angeles, California, for Appellees.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
-- 2 of 3 --
3
PER CURIAM:
Robert B. Curington and Ashley Brooks Music appeal the
district court’s orders dismissing their copyright infringement
suit and awarding attorney’s fees and costs to the Defendants,
pursuant to 17 U.S.C. § 505 (2006). We have reviewed the record
and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the
reasons stated by the district court. Curington v. UMG
Recordings, Inc., No. 1:10-cv-00890-CCE-PTS (M.D.N.C. Aug. 12,
2011; Dec. 2, 2011). We deny Appellants’ motions for
appointment of counsel and dispense with oral argument because
the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the
materials before the court and argument would not aid the
decisional process.
AFFIRMED
-- 3 of 3 --
Connect Omnilex to search the legal corpus from your AI assistant.