Opinion ID: 777291
Heading Depth: 4
Heading Rank: 2

Heading: did hicks conduct an adequate factual investigation?

Text: 55 The district court concluded that Hicks filed a case without factual foundation. Hicks, having argued unsuccessfully that his failure to perform even minimal due diligence was irrelevant as a matter of copyright law, does not contest that he would have been able to discover the copyright information simply by examining the doll heads. Instead he argues that the district court did not understand certain complex issues. Simply saying so does not make it so. The district court well understood the legal and factual background of the case. It was Hicks' absence of investigation, not the district court's absence of analysis, that brought about his downfall. 56 The district court did not abuse its discretion in concluding that Hicks' failure to investigate fell below the requisite standard established by Rule 11. 57