Nadezhda V. Wood v. Sergey Kapustin, et al

Filing

PER CURIAM OPINION FILED - THE COURT: James B. Loken, Pasco M. Bowman and Steven M. Colloton (UNPUBLISHED) [4354998] [14-2996]

United States Court of Appeals
For the Eighth Circuit
___________________________
No. 14-2996
___________________________
Nadezhda V. Wood
lllllllllllllllllllll Plaintiff - Appellant
v.
Sergey Kapustin; Irina Kapustina; Mikhail Goloverya; Global Auto, Inc.; G Auto
Sales, Inc.; Effect Auto Sales, Inc.
lllllllllllllllllllll Defendants - Appellees
____________
Appeal from United States District Court
for the District of Minnesota - Minneapolis
____________
Submitted: December 24, 2015
Filed: January 12, 2016
[Unpublished]
____________
Before LOKEN, BOWMAN, and COLLOTON, Circuit Judges.
____________
PER CURIAM.

Appellate Case: 14-2996

Page: 1

Date Filed: 01/12/2016 Entry ID: 4354998

Nadezhda Wood appeals after the District Court1 dismissed her action because
it lacked personal jurisdiction over the defendants and then denied her motion to alter
or amend the judgment. After careful de novo review, we conclude that dismissal
was proper. See Walden v. Fiore, 134 S. Ct. 1115, 1121–23 (2014) (discussing
personal jurisdiction). Additionally, we conclude that the District Court did not abuse
its discretion in denying Wood’s motion to alter or amend the judgment. See United
States v. Metro. St. Louis Sewer Dist., 440 F.3d 930, 933 (8th Cir. 2006) (reviewing
the denial of a Rule 59(e) motion for abuse of discretion and noting that such a
motion cannot be used to introduce new evidence which could have been offered
prior to the entry of judgment).
Accordingly, we affirm.
______________________________

1

The Honorable David S. Doty, United States District Judge for the District of
Minnesota.
-2-

Appellate Case: 14-2996

Page: 2

Date Filed: 01/12/2016 Entry ID: 4354998