The opinion
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
____________________________________
)
JOSEPH R. WAKER, JR., )
)
Plaintiff, )
)
v. ) Civil Action No. 10-0658 (PLF)
)
DEVON BROWN et al., )
)
Defendants. )
____________________________________)
MEMORANDUM OPINION
Pending before the Court is the motion of the remaining defendant, the District
Columbia, to dismiss the complaint. See Order of December 9, 2010 (dismissing the complaint
against the individual defendants). By Order of January 6, 2011, plaintiff, proceeding pro se,
was advised consistent with Fox v. Strickland, 837 F.2d 507 (D.C. Cir. 1988), about his
obligation to respond to the District of Columbia’s motion by February 7, 2011, or risk dismissal
of the complaint on a conceded motion. Plaintiff has neither filed a response nor sought
additional time to do so. The Court therefore will treat the pending motion as conceded and will
now dismiss the case. A separate Order accompanies this Memorandum Opinion.
/s/________________________
PAUL L. FRIEDMAN
DATE: March 3, 2011 United States District Judge