Case ID: f-appx_584/html/0003-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "PER CURIAM.", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

Daniel A. VIRTUE, for himself and a class of similarly situated persons, Appellant, v. INTERNATIONAL BROTHERHOOD OF TEAMSTERS RETIREMENT AND FAMILY PROTECTION PLAN, et al., Appellees.
    No. 13-7194.
    United States Court of Appeals, District of Columbia Circuit.
    Nov. 18, 2014.
    Kevin Daniel Stein, Joseph Semo, Semo Law Group, Washington, DC, for Appellant.
    Jeffrey B. Cohen, James Charles Bailey, Jason Herbert Ehrenberg, Bailey & Ehrenberg PLLC, Bradley T. Raymond, International Brotherhood of Teamsters, AFL-CIO Office of the General Counsel, Washington, DC, for Appellees.
    Before: GARLAND, Chief Judge, WILKINS, Circuit Judge, and WILLIAMS, Senior Circuit Judge.
   JUDGMENT

PER CURIAM.

This appeal was considered on the record from the United States District Court for the District of Columbia and on the briefs of the parties and oral arguments of counsel. The court has accorded the issues full consideration and has determined that they do not warrant a published opinion. See D.C.Cir. R. 36(d). It is

ORDERED AND ADJUDGED that the judgment of the District Court be affirmed.

Daniel Virtue appeals the District Court’s rulings denying class certification and granting summary judgment to the defendants. We affirm because we agree, for the reasons stated by the District Court, that Virtue’s claims are time-barred. Virtue v. Int’l Bhd. of Teamsters Ret. & Family Prot. Plan, 997 F.Supp.2d 10 (D.D.C.2013).

Pursuant to D.C. Circuit Rule 36, this disposition will not be published.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