Case Name: TOMMY BAHAMA GROUP, INC., Plaintiff-Counterdefendant-Appellee, v. Richard SEXTON, DefendantCounterclaimant-Appellant
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2012-04-23
Citations: 476 F. App'x 122
Docket Number: No. 10-15005
Parties: TOMMY BAHAMA GROUP, INC., Plaintiff-Counterdefendant-Appellee, v. Richard SEXTON, DefendantCounterclaimant-Appellant.
Judges: Before: SCHROEDER, O’SCANNLAIN, and GRABER, Circuit Judges.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 476
Pages: 122–122

Head Matter:
TOMMY BAHAMA GROUP, INC., Plaintiff-Counterdefendant-Appellee, v. Richard SEXTON, DefendantCounterclaimant-Appellant.
No. 10-15005.
United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.
Argued and Submitted April 16, 2012.
Filed April 23, 2012.
Jessica E. Jacob, Robert L. Lee, Esquire, Alston & Bird, Atlanta, GA, Peter P. Meringolo, Esquire, Snyder Miller & Or-ton LLP, San Francisco, CA, for Plaintiff-Counterdefendant-Appellee.
Richard Sexton, Nicasio, CA, pro se.
Before: SCHROEDER, O’SCANNLAIN, and GRABER, Circuit Judges.

Opinion:
MEMORANDUM
Richard Sexton appeals from the district court's grant of summary judgment in favor of Tommy Bahama. The facts are known to the parties and will not be recounted here.
Before the district court, Sexton did not introduce sufficient evidence to counter Laura Case's declaration that the shirts he sold in 2004 were counterfeit. Nor did he specifically call into question Case's credibility. Thus, viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to Sexton, the non-moving party, there was no genuine issue of material fact as to whether the shirts he sold in 2004 were authentic. Anderson v. Liberty Lobby, Inc., 477 U.S. 242, 249-50, 106 S.Ct. 2505, 91 L.Ed.2d 202 (1986). Accordingly, the district court did not err in granting summary judgment to Tommy Bahama on its infringement claims.
It was Sexton's burden to "overcome th[e] strong presumption" against the application of laches. Reno Air Racing Ass'n v. McCord, 452 F.3d 1126, 1138-39 (9th Cir.2006). The district court did not abuse its discretion or commit clear error in concluding he did not meet that burden. Jarrow Formulas, Inc. v. Nutrition Now, Inc., 304 F.3d 829, 833-34 (9th Cir.2002).
Because the record supports a finding that Sexton "has failed diligently to pursue discovery" during this litigation, Emp'rs Teamsters Local Nos. 175 & 505 Pension Trust Fund v. Clorox Co., 353 F.3d 1125, 1130 (9th Cir.2004) (internal quotation marks omitted), it was not an abuse of discretion for the district court to deny Sexton's request for a continuance of Tommy Bahama's summary judgment motion, Visa Int'l Serv. Ass'n v. Bankcard Holders of Am., 784 F.2d 1472, 1475 (9th Cir.1986).
AFFIRMED.
This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.
. Since Case's declaration is sufficient to affirm the district court's grant of summary judgment, we do not address Sexton's argument that it was improper for the magistrate judge herself to conduct a comparison of Sexton's eBay listings and Tommy Bahama cata-logues.