Darlene Lanell Hosea, pro se, challenges the summary judgment awarded Defendants, contending a genuine issue of material fact exists on whether her home-equity loan is valid. The note for that loan from Ameriquest Mortgage Company was assigned to Wells Fargo Minnesota NA.

*398 After Hosea defaulted, Wells Fargo sought judicial foreclosure. Hosea responded by filing multiple complaints against Ameriquest and Wells Fargo, three of which were consolidated into this action.

A summary judgment is reviewed de novo, applying the same standard as did the district court. E.g., Wheeler v. BL Dev. Corp., 415 F.3d 399, 401 (5th Cir. 2005). Such judgment is appropriate if there is no genuine issue of material fact and the movant is entitled to judgment as a matter of law. Fed.R.CivP. 56(c). No genuine issue of material fact exists if, pursuant to the summary-judgment evidence, no reasonable juror could find in favor of the nonmovant. E.g., Jenkins v. Methodist Hosps. of Dallas, Inc., 478 F.3d 255, 260 (5th Cir.), cert. denied, — U.S. -, 128 S.Ct. 181, 169 L.Ed.2d 35 (2007).

Hosea contends: according to public records, the property securing the home-equity loan is more than one acre; homesteads could not be more than one acre when she executed the loan; therefore, it is invalid. See Tex. Const, art. XVI, § 51 (amended 1999) (defining homestead). Assuming arguendo her legal contention is correct, Hosea failed to present any evidence establishing the property is more than one acre. On the other hand, as the district court found, defendants introduced uncontroverted evidence showing the plot securing the loan is less than an acre.

Accordingly, and essentially for the reasons stated by the district court, the judgment is AFFIRMED.