Case ID: f-appx_427/html/0013-01.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

Dale Alonzo COPEMANN, Appellant v. James C. REDDICK, et al., Appellees.
    No. 11-7044.
    United States Court of Appeals, District of Columbia Circuit.
    Aug. 3, 2011.
    Rehearing En Banc Denied Oct. 13, 2011.
    Dale Alonzo Copemann, Gainesville, FL, pro se.
    BEFORE: SENTELLE, Chief Judge, and GARLAND and BROWN, Circuit Judges.
   JUDGMENT

PER CURIAM.

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

ORDERED AND ADJUDGED that the district court’s order, filed April 19, 2011, denying appellant’s motion to reopen case, be affirmed. The district court did not abuse its discretion in refusing to reopen appellant’s case that had been dismissed for failure to state a claim more than eleven years earlier.

Pursuant to D.C. Circuit Rule 36, this disposition will not be published.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. Rule 41.