Document ID: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caDC-24-07110/USCOURTS-caDC-24-07110-0/pdf.json

Parties Involved:
Booz Allen Hamilton, Inc.
Appellee
Harold Jean-Baptiste
Appellant

Document Text:

United States Court of Appeals

FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA CIRCUIT

____________

No. 24-7110 September Term, 2024

1:22-cv-01499-TNM

Filed On: January 6, 2025

Harold Jean-Baptiste,

Appellant

v.

Booz Allen Hamilton, Inc.,

Appellee

ON APPEAL FROM THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA

BEFORE: Katsas, Childs, and Garcia, Circuit Judges

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 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 July 26, 2024 order denying

appellant’s summary judgment motion and granting appellee’s cross-motion for

summary judgment be affirmed. Appellant has not demonstrated that the district court

erred in concluding that he failed to provide sufficient evidence for a reasonable finding

of a conspiracy under 42 U.S.C. § 1985(3). See Atherton v. D.C. Office of the Mayor,

567 F.3d 672, 688 (D.C. Cir. 2009). Furthermore, appellant’s request for a default

judgment under Federal Rule of Appellate Procedure 15(b)(2) fails because this is an

appeal from the district court rather than an application for enforcement of an agency

order. Finally, appellant’s allegations of judicial bias are without merit. See Liteky v.

United States, 510 U.S. 540, 555 (1994) (“[J]udicial rulings alone almost never

constitute a valid basis for a bias or partiality motion.”).

USCA Case #24-7110 Document #2092667 Filed: 01/06/2025 Page 1 of 2
United States Court of Appeals

FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA CIRCUIT

____________

No. 24-7110 September Term, 2024

Pursuant to D.C. Circuit Rule 36, this disposition will not be published.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

Page 2

USCA Case #24-7110 Document #2092667 Filed: 01/06/2025 Page 2 of 2