Moog, Incorporated v. Lunin

UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 06-1661
MOOG, INCORPORATED,
Plaintiff - Appellee,
versus
STEPAN V. LUNIN,
Defendant - Appellant.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern
District of Virginia, at Norfolk. Rebecca Beach Smith, District
Judge. (2:06-cv-00238-RBS)
Submitted: January 17, 2007 Decided: February 14, 2007
Before GREGORY, SHEDD, and DUNCAN, Circuit Judges.
Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Stepan V. Lunin, Appellant Pro Se. Steven Roy Zahn, MCGUIREWOODS,
L.L.P., Norfolk, Virginia; William Harrison Baxter, II,
MCGUIREWOODS, L.L.P., Richmond, Virginia, for Appellee.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

-- 1 of 2 --

- 2 -
PER CURIAM:
Stepan V. Lunin appeals the district court’s order
granting Moog, Inc.’s (“Moog”) motion for a preliminary injunction
against him. We have reviewed the record and find the district
court did not abuse its discretion in granting the motion.
Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district
court. See Moog, Inc. v. Lunin, No. 2:06-cv-00238-RBS (E.D. Va.
June 7, 2006).
Further, we grant Moog’s motions for protective orders,
filed September 6, 2006, September 11, 2006, September 15, 2006,
September 25, 2006, and September 29, 2006, in which Moog seeks to
seal various pleadings Lunin filed with this court. However, we
deny Moog’s September 18, 2006 motion for a protective order
because the document this motion targets was never filed with this
court. Further, we deny Moog’s August 29, 2006 motion for a
protective order because it is duplicative of the relief requested
in the September 6, 2006 motion.
We 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

-- 2 of 2 --