                  United States Court of Appeals
                              For the Eighth Circuit
                          ___________________________

                                  No. 18-2739
                          ___________________________

                                      Aric W. Hall

                         lllllllllllllllllllllPlaintiff - Appellant

                                            v.

                                  Capella University

                        lllllllllllllllllllllDefendant - Appellee
                                       ____________

                     Appeal from United States District Court
                      for the District of Minnesota - St. Paul
                                  ____________

                              Submitted: May 20, 2019
                                Filed: May 23, 2019
                                   [Unpublished]
                                   ____________

Before BENTON, STRAS, and KOBES, Circuit Judges.
                           ____________

PER CURIAM.

      Aric Hall appeals the district court’s1 dismissal of his diversity action alleging
fraud and false advertising against Capella University. After de novo review,

      1
      The Honorable David S. Doty, United States District Judge for the District of
Minnesota.
see Montin v. Moore, 846 F.3d 289, 292 (8th Cir. 2017) (standard of review), we
agree with the district court that Hall’s complaint did not plead his fraud or false
advertising claims with the specificity required by Federal Rule of Civil Procedure
9(b), see Fed. R. Civ. P. 9(b) (party must plead circumstances constituting fraud with
particularity); E-Shops Corp. v. U.S. Bank Nat’l Ass’n, 678 F.3d 659, 665 (8th Cir.
2012) (Rule 9(b)’s heightened pleading requirement applies to claims arising under
Minn. Stat. §§ 325D.44 and 325F.69); Drobnak v. Andersen Corp., 561 F.3d 778, 783
(8th Cir. 2009) (party alleging fraud must plead time, place, and contents of false
representation, and identity of person making misrepresentation).

      We affirm the judgment of the district court. See 8th Cir. R. 47B.
                      ______________________________




                                         -2-
