David F. Leach v. Mediacom

Opinion

United States Court of Appeals FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT

___________

No. 03-1447

___________

David F. Leach, *

*

Appellant, * * Appeal from the United States v. * District Court for the * Southern District of Iowa.

Mediacom, *

*

Appellee, * [PUBLISHED]

*

United States of America, *

*

Movant Below. *

___________

Submitted: December 10, 2003 Filed: June 28, 2004

___________

Before RILEY, HANSEN, and SMITH, Circuit Judges.

___________

PER CURIAM.

David F. Leach appeals the district court’s1 dismissal of his complaint, purportedly brought under the Cable Communications Policy Act. See 47 U.S.C. § 521 et seq. Having carefully reviewed the record, we agree with the district court

1 The Honorable Harold D. Vietor, United States District Judge for the Southern District of Iowa.

that there is no implied private right of action under 47 U.S.C. § 531(e), as Congress expressly gave the franchiser enforcement authority. See Alexander v. Sandoval, 532 U.S. 275, 290 (2001) (“The express provision of one method of enforcing a substantive rule suggests that Congress intended to preclude others.”) Accordingly, we affirm the judgment of the district court. See 8th Cir. R. 47B.

______________________________