Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist

407 F. App'x 489

Colbert v. Driehaus

U.S. Courts of Appeals

Decided January 25, 2011

U.S. Courts of Appeals · decided 2011-01-25

Cited by 2 later decisions — most recently July 2012

1 district ·

Relies on Ciralsky v. Central Intelligence Agency

Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know

Decided 2011-01-25

View the full empirical analysis of this case →

¶1JUDGMENT

PER CURIAM.

¶2This appeal was considered on the record from the United States District Court for the District of Columbia and on the brief filed by the appellant. See Fed. R.App. P. 34(a)(2); D.C.Cir. Rule 34(j). It is

¶3ORDERED AND ADJUDGED that the district court’s order issued July 23, 2010, be affirmed. The district court did not abuse its discretion in dismissing the appellant’s complaint without prejudice for failure to comply with Fed.R.Civ.P. 8(a), which requires “a short and plain statement of the claim showing that the pleader is entitled to relief.” See Ciralsky v. CIA, 355 F.3d 661, 668-71 (D.C.Cir.2004).

¶4Pursuant to D.C. Circuit Rule 36, this disposition will not be published. The Clerk is directed to withhold issuance of the mandate herein until seven days after resolution of any timely petition for rehearing or petition for rehearing en banc. See Fed. R.App. P. 41(b); D.C.Cir. Rule 41.

/407/fappx/489 · .json · Public domain