Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caDC-16-07074/USCOURTS-caDC-16-07074-0/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 440
Nature of Suit: Other Civil Rights
Cause of Action: 

---

United States Court of Appeals

FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA CIRCUIT

____________

No. 16-7074 September Term, 2016

1:16-cv-01123-UNA

Filed On: October 19, 2016

Robert G. Modrall,

Appellant

v.

Melissa Frey, et al.,

Appellees

ON APPEAL FROM THE UNITED STATES COURT

FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA

BEFORE: Brown and Pillard, Circuit Judges, and Ginsburg, Senior Circuit Judge

J U D G M E N T

This appeal was considered on the record from the United States District Court for the

District of Columbia and on appellant’s brief. 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 June 15, 2016, be

affirmed. The district court correctly determined that appellant failed to state a

claim upon which relief could be granted because the complaint did not contain

“sufficient factual matter, accepted as true, to ‘state a claim to relief that is plausible on

its face.’” Ashcroft v. Iqbal, 556 U.S. 662, 678 (2009) (quoting Bell Atlantic Corp. v.

Twombly, 550 U.S. 544, 570 (2007)). Although the complaint alleged retaliation against

appellant for his exercise of First Amendment rights, it did not clearly describe any activity by

appellant protected by the First Amendment.

Pursuant to D.C. Circuit Rule 36, this disposition will not be published.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

Per Curiam

FOR THE COURT:

Mark J. Langer, Clerk

BY: /s/

Ken Meadows

Deputy Clerk

USCA Case #16-7074 Document #1641643 Filed: 10/19/2016 Page 1 of 1