Case Name: Renata MARCINKOWSKA, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. IMG WORLDWIDE, INCORPORATED, an Ohio corporation; Del Campo Saatchi & Saatchi, an Argentine company, Defendants-Appellees
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2009-04-15
Citations: 322 F. App'x 289
Docket Number: No. 09-1115
Parties: Renata MARCINKOWSKA, Plaintiff—Appellant, v. IMG WORLDWIDE, INCORPORATED, an Ohio corporation; Del Campo Saatchi & Saatchi, an Argentine company, Defendants—Appellees.
Judges: Before NIEMEYER and MOTZ, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 322
Pages: 289–290

Head Matter:
Renata MARCINKOWSKA, Plaintiff—Appellant, v. IMG WORLDWIDE, INCORPORATED, an Ohio corporation; Del Campo Saatchi & Saatchi, an Argentine company, Defendants—Appellees.
No. 09-1115.
United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.
Submitted: March 25, 2009.
Decided: April 15, 2009.
Renata Marcinkowska, Appellant Pro Se. William H. Brewster, Kilpatrick & Stockton, LLP, Atlanta, Georgia, John Witherspoon Foster, Kilpatrick & Stockton, LLP, Columbia, South Carolina; Hamlet Sam Mabry, III, Haynsworth, Sinkler & Boyd, PA, Greenville, South Carolina, for Appellees.
Before NIEMEYER and MOTZ, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge.

Opinion:
Dismissed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
PER CURIAM:
Renata Marcinkowska appeals the district court's dismissal, pursuant to Fed. R.Civ.P. 12(b)(2) and (6), of her complaint alleging patent infringement in violation of 35 U.S.C. § 271 (2006), as well as other matters. Because Marcinkowska incorrectly designated this court as the appellate court, when the United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit has exclusive appellate jurisdiction of this patent infringement matter, see 28 U.S.C. § 1295(a)(1) (2006); Christianson v. Colt Indus. Operating Corp., 486 U.S. 800, 807, 108 S.Ct. 2166, 100 L.Ed.2d 811 (1988), we grant the motions to dismiss for lack of jurisdiction filed by Defendants.
DISMISSED.
Our finding that this appeal should have been pursued in the United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit would ordinarily require this court to transfer the matter to that court. See 28 U.S.C. § 1631 (2006). We find it not to be in the interest of justice to do so here, however, as our review of the Federal Circuit's docket information reveals that Mar-cinkowska's appeal was noted by that court on February 25, 2009.