Rougoogaran v. Natkunanathan
Filed 2/7/06 Rougoogaran v. Natkunanathan CA4/3
NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN OFFICIAL REPORTS
California Rules of Court, rule 977(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for publication or ordered published, except as specified by rule 977(b). This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 977
IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA
FOURTH APPELLATE DISTRICT
DIVISION THREE
| RAZIEH ROUFOOGARAN, Plaintiff and Respondent, v. SIVATHARAN NATKUNANATHAN, Defendant and Appellant. | G035648 (Super. Ct. No. 05HLO1020) O P I N I O N |
Appeal from an order of the Superior Court of Orange County, Margaret R. Anderson, Judge. Affirmed.
R. M. Anthony Cosio for Defendant and Appellant.
David C. Voss, Jr., and Mana F. Bolourchi for Plaintiff and Respondent.
Sivatharan Natkunanathan appeals from an injunction that ordered him to cease harassing Razieh Roufoogaran. Natkunanathan argues the evidence does not support the order, and he was denied the opportunity to be heard in opposition. We disagree and affirm.
* * *
Natkunanathan began sending Roufoogaran e-mail messages in 2000, when both were graduate students at the same school. Roufoogaran subsequently went to work for Broadcom, in Irvine. In January 2003, Natkunanathan obtained her e-mail address there and wrote, asking for her telephone number and â€
