Case Name: Gwendolyn B. SMITH, Appellant v. DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA, Appellee
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2008-10-27
Citations: 298 F. App'x 6
Docket Number: No. 06-7198
Parties: Gwendolyn B. SMITH, Appellant v. DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA, Appellee
Judges: Before: GRIFFITH, Circuit Judge, and EDWARDS and WILLIAMS, Senior Circuit Judges.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 298
Pages: 6–7

Head Matter:
Gwendolyn B. SMITH, Appellant v. DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA, Appellee
No. 06-7198.
United States Court of Appeals, District of Columbia Circuit.
Oct. 27, 2008.
Rehearing Denied Dec. 19, 2008.
Lucille Saundra White, White & Associates, Bowie, MD, for Appellant.
Edward Eugene Schwab, Deputy Attorney General, Richard Stuart Love, Office of Attorney General for the District of Columbia, Office of the Solicitor General, Washington, DC, for Appellee.
Before: GRIFFITH, Circuit Judge, and EDWARDS and WILLIAMS, Senior Circuit Judges.

Opinion:
JUDGMENT
PER CURIAM.
This cause was considered on the record from the United States District Court for the District of Columbia and was briefed by counsel. It is
ORDERED and ADJUDGED that the judgment of the District Court is hereby affirmed.
Although the Magistrate Judge stated the wrong standard when addressing the Rule 59 motion for a new trial, his analysis indicated he actually applied the correct standard, and therefore there was no abuse of discretion. Furthermore, even if there was error, it was harmless because the appellant has stated no viable grounds to justify the grant of a new trial.
Pursuant to D.C. Circuit Rule 36, this disposition will not be published.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 rehearing en banc. See Fed. R.App. P. 41(b); D.C. Cir. R. 41.