Opinion

Brown v. Baradel

  • 360 F. App'x 162
Court
Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit
Filed
Jan 4, 2010
Status
Published
Author
Cüriam
On the bench
Brown, Cüriam, Griffith, Sentelle
Cited by
0 cases
Authority
More cited than 10.9%

The opinion

JUDGMENT

PER CÜRIAM.

This appeal was considered on the record from the United States District Court *163 for the District of Columbia and on the brief and appendix filed by the appellant. See Fed. R.App. P. 34(a)(2); D.C.Cir. Rule 84(j). It is

ORDERED AND ADJUDGED that the district court’s order filed August 28, 2009 be affirmed. The district court did not abuse its discretion by dismissing appellant’s complaint without prejudice on the ground that it did not meet the requirements of Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 8(a). See Ciralsky v. CIA, 355 F.3d 661, 668-71 (D.C.Cir.2004). That rule requires “a short and plain statement of the claim showing that the pleader is entitled to relief.” Fed.R.Civ.P. 8(a). The dismissal without prejudice allows appellant to file a new complaint that meets the requirements of Rule 8(a). See Ciralsky, 355 F.3d at 669-70 .

Pursuant to D.C. Circuit Rule 36, this disposition will not be published.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. RApp. P. 41(b); D.C.Cir. Rule 41.

This is a copy of a public record, reproduced as it was published. It is not legal advice, and it may not be the version a court would rely on. Check the official source before you cite it.

A word about cookies

We need a few to keep you signed in and the library working. The rest help us see which pages people use and where they get stuck. They stay off unless you say yes.