# Randy Brown v. DC

> Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · May 31, 2023

URL: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9398432

## Case

- **Court:** Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit
- **Decided:** May 31, 2023
- **Precedential status:** Unpublished
- **Opinion:** Opinion
- **Cited by:** 0 later opinions in the Frix Law Library

## Citator (automated)

- No negative treatment found by the automated citator. That is not the same as a confirmation that the case is good law; read the citing cases.
- Full citator and citing cases: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9398432

## Opinion text

United States Court of Appeals
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA CIRCUIT
____________
No. 22-7069 September Term, 2022
1:16-cv-00947-EGS
Filed On: May 31, 2023
Randy Brown,

Appellant

v.

District of Columbia,

Appellee

ON APPEAL FROM THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA

BEFORE: Millett, Pillard, and Rao, Circuit Judges

JUDGMENT

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

ORDERED AND ADJUDGED that the district court’s March 30, 2022 order be
affirmed. Appellant has not shown that the district court abused its discretion in
denying his motion to reopen the time to appeal when the criteria for doing so under
Federal Rule of Appellate Procedure 4(a)(6) were not met, and the district court
therefore lacked authority to grant his motion. See 28 U.S.C. § 2107(c); Ladeairous v.
Garland, 45 F.4th 188, 191 (D.C. Cir. 2022) (statutorily prescribed components of Rule
4(a)(6) are jurisdictional); In re: Sealed Case (Bowles), 624 F.3d 482, 483-84 (D.C. Cir.
2010) (180-day deadline for reopening the time to file an appeal is not subject to
equitable exceptions). Appellant has not raised any argument regarding the district
court’s denial of relief under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 60(b) and thus has
forfeited any such challenge. See United States ex rel. Totten v. Bombardier Corp.,
380 F.3d 488, 497 (D.C. Cir. 2004). We also do not reach any issue related to the
district court’s underlying summary judgment ruling because the appeal is not timely as
to that order. See Fed. R. App. P. 4(a)(1)(A).

Pursuant to D.C. Circuit Rule 36, this disposition will not be published.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
United States Court of Appeals
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA CIRCUIT
____________
No. 22-7069 September Term, 2022

of any timely petition for rehearing or petition for rehearing en banc. See Fed. R. App.
P. 41(b); D.C. Cir. Rule 41.

Per Curiam

Page 2

---

Source: Frix Law Library, https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9398432. Public record. Not legal advice.