OPINION

Susan Matlock sued Atomic Pawn, L.L.C. and Atomic Pawn, Inc. (collectively Atomic Pawn), alleging that the title-pledge agreements the parties entered into violated the Truth in Lending Act (TILA) (15 U.S.C. § 1601 et seq.), and various state laws. Both parties moved for summary judgment. The district court granted Atomic Pawn’s motion, dismissing Matlock’s TILA claim with prejudice and declining to maintain supplemental jurisdiction over the state-law claims. Matlock appealed.

After carefully considering the record on appeal, the briefs of the parties, and the applicable law, and having had the benefit of oral argument, we agree with the district court’s grant of summary judgment to Atomic Pawn. Because the reasoning that supports the judgment for Atomic Pawn has been clearly articulated by the district court in a thorough and comprehensive opinion, the issuance of a detailed written opinion by us would be unduly duplicative. The judgment rendered by the Honorable Thomas A. Varían, District Judge of the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Tennessee, is accordingly affirmed on the basis of the reasoning detailed in his Opinion dated October 5, 2005.