David F. Leach v. Mediacom

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.
______________________________
-2-