Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caDC-15-07139/USCOURTS-caDC-15-07139-0/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 550
Nature of Suit: Prisoner - Civil Rights (U.S. defendant)
Cause of Action: 

---

James Nelson,

Appellant

V.

State of Florida, et al.,

Appellees

ON APPEAL FROM THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA

BEFORE: Rogers and Kavanaugh, Circuit Judges; Ginsburg, Senior Circuit

Judge

JUDGMENT

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

for the District of Columbia and on appellant’s brief. 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 October 14,

2015, be affirmed. The district court properly dismissed appellant’s complaint for failure

to comply with Fed. R. Civ. P. 8(a), which requires “a short and plain statement of the

claim showing that the pleader is entitled to relief,” in order to “give the defendant fair

notice of what the ... claim is and the grounds upon which it rests.” Bell Atlantic Corp. v.

Twombly, 550 U.S. 544, 555 (2007) (internal quotation marks omitted); see

Ciraisky v. CIA, 355 F.3d 661, 668-71 (D.C. Cit. 2004). Appellant also appeals the

district court’s denial of leave to file a proposed amended complaint after the case had

been dismissed without prejudice. There was no need to reopen the case to allowappellant to file the amended complaint, however, because it suffered from the same

defect as the original complaint. See Firestone v. Firestone, 76 F.3d 1205, 1208 (D.C.

Cit. 1996) (explaining that a district court does not abuse its discretion in denying leave

to amend a complaint where amendment would be futile).

Pursuant to D.C. Circuit Rule 36, this disposition will not be published.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

Per Curiam

FOR THE COURT:

Mark J. Langer, Clerk

By: Is!

Ken Meadows

Deputy Clerk

Page 2