Case Name: Brad KEMPO, Appellant v. UNITED STATES of America, Appellee
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2014-07-29
Citations: 574 F. App'x 1
Docket Number: No. 14-5054
Parties: Brad KEMPO, Appellant v. UNITED STATES of America, Appellee.
Judges: BEFORE: BROWN and KAVANAUGH, Circuit Judges, and GINSBURG, Senior Circuit Judge.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 574
Pages: 1–1

Head Matter:
Brad KEMPO, Appellant v. UNITED STATES of America, Appellee.
No. 14-5054.
United States Court of Appeals, District of Columbia Circuit.
July 29, 2014.
Rehearing En Banc Denied Sept. 28, 2014.
Brad Kempo, Vancouver, BC, pro se.
R. Craig Lawrence, U.S. Attorney’s Office, Washington, DC, for Appellee.
BEFORE: BROWN and KAVANAUGH, Circuit Judges, and GINSBURG, Senior Circuit Judge.

Opinion:
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(3). It is
ORDERED AND ADJUDGED that the district court's order filed February 18, 2014, be affirmed. The district court properly dismissed the complaint for lack of subject matter jurisdiction because it is "patently insubstantial, presenting no federal question suitable for decision." Tooley v. Napolitano, 586 F.3d 1006, 1009 (D.C.Cir.2009) (quoting Best v. Kelly, 39 F.3d 328, 330 (D.C.Cir.1994)).
Pursuant to D.C. Circuit Rule 36, this disposition will not be published.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.