United States v. Elias

* Pursuant to 5TH CIR. R. 47.5, the court has determined
that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent
except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH CIR.
R. 47.5.4.
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT
No. 00-50726
Summary Calendar
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff-Appellee,
versus
FREDERICK ELIAS,
Defendant-Appellant.
--------------------
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Western District of Texas
USDC No. SA-98-CV-1192-HG
--------------------
April 12, 2001
Before SMITH, BENAVIDES, and DENNIS, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM:*
Frederick Elias appeals the summary judgment in favor of
the United States and the order denying Elias’ motion for relief
from the judgment. Elias contends that the district court did
not consider the evidence that he presented to controvert the
United States’ contention concerning the amount due.
We review the grant of a summary judgment motion de novo.
Fraire v. City of Arlington, 957 F.2d 1268, 1273 (5th Cir. 1992).
If the moving party files a properly supported motion for a
summary judgment, the burden shifts to the nonmovant to provide

-- 1 of 2 --

No. 00-50726
-2-
affidavits or other competent summary judgment evidence that sets
forth specific facts showing the existence of a genuine issue for
trial. Fed. R. Civ. P. 56(e). The nonmovant cannot satisfy his
summary judgment burden with “mere allegations or denials of the
adverse party’s pleading.” Id.
The United States filed a properly supported summary
judgment motion showing the amount owed by Elias. Elias refuted
the amount due with unverified allegations and uncertified copies
of correspondence with St. Mary’s University and the Department
Of Education.
Elias did not refute the United States’ summary judgment
motion with competent controverting evidence. See Fed. R. Civ.
P. 56(e). Accordingly, the district court’s judgment is
affirmed.
AFFIRMED.

-- 2 of 2 --