Michael Owens v. Major League Baseball

Filing

UNPUBLISHED PER CURIAM OPINION filed. Originating case number: 3:15-cv-00102-GCM. Copies to all parties and the district court. [999606375]. Mailed to: Michael Owens. [15-1368]

Appeal: 15-1368

Doc: 6

Filed: 06/22/2015

Pg: 1 of 3

UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 15-1368

MICHAEL EUGENE OWENS, d/b/a The Pink House at Charlotte,
d/b/a Pink Tie Ball, d/b/a Dress Like a Winner, d/b/a
Owen's Hauling Company, d/b/a The Owen's Report, d/b/a Ties
on Wheels, d/b/a Yomon,
Plaintiff - Appellant,
v.
MAJOR LEAGUE BASEBALL; NATIONAL BASKETBALL ASSOCIATION;
NATIONAL FOOTBALL LEAGUE; ROB MANFRED; NATIONAL HOCKEY
LEAGUE; ADAM SILVER; MARK A. TATUM; ATTILA GAZDAG; ROGER
GOODELL; DAVE GARDI; TROY VINCENT; PAUL J. TAGLIABUE; GARY
B. BATTMAN; DAN MARR; JOHN O'NEAL; COLIN CAPBELL; JOHN
COLLINS; NASCAR HEADQUARTERS; BRIAN FRANCE; MIKE HELTON;
LADIES
PROFESSIONAL
GOLF
ASSOCIATION;
MICHAEL
WHAN;
PROFESSIONAL GOLF ASSOCIATION OF AMERICA; PETER BEVACQUA;
DEREK SPRAQUE,
Defendants - Appellees.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western
District of North Carolina, at Charlotte.
Graham C. Mullen,
Senior District Judge. (3:15-cv-00102-GCM)

Submitted:

June 18, 2015

Decided:

Before SHEDD, DUNCAN, and AGEE, Circuit Judges.

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

June 22, 2015

Appeal: 15-1368

Doc: 6

Filed: 06/22/2015

Pg: 2 of 3

Michael Eugene Owens, Appellant Pro Se.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

2

Appeal: 15-1368

Doc: 6

Filed: 06/22/2015

Pg: 3 of 3

PER CURIAM:
Michael

Eugene

Owens

appeals

the

district

court’s

order

dismissing his copyright infringement complaint under 28 U.S.C.
§ 1915(e)(2)(B) (2012).
that

this

appeal
court.

appeal
for

is

We have reviewed the record and find

frivolous.

the

Accordingly,

reasons

stated

by

we
the

dismiss

the

district

See Owens v. Major League Baseball, No. 3:15-cv-00102-

GCM (W.D.N.C. Apr. 2, 2015).

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.

DISMISSED

3