Case Name: Larry RUTHER, Appellant v. STATE FARM MUTUAL AUTOMOBILE INSURANCE COMPANY, Appellee
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2006-10-19
Citations: 204 F. App'x 28
Docket Number: No. 06-7098
Parties: Larry RUTHER, Appellant v. STATE FARM MUTUAL AUTOMOBILE INSURANCE COMPANY, Appellee.
Judges: 
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 204
Pages: 28–28

Head Matter:
Larry RUTHER, Appellant v. STATE FARM MUTUAL AUTOMOBILE INSURANCE COMPANY, Appellee.
No. 06-7098.
United States Court of Appeals, District of Columbia Circuit.
Oct. 19, 2006.
Larry Ruther, Manassas, VA, pro se.
Before: GINSBURG, Chief Judge, and ROGERS and GRIFFITH, Circuit Judges.

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(j). It is
ORDERED AND ADJUDGED that the district court's orders filed May 8, 2006, and May 25, 2006, be affirmed. The district court did not abuse its discretion in dismissing the complaint without prejudice on the ground that it did not meet the requirements of Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 8(a) as the complaint did not contain a "short and plain statement" of the basis for the federal court's jurisdiction and a "short and plain statement" of the claim or claims showing that he is entitled to relief. Fed.R.Civ.P. 8(a)(1), (2); see Ciralsky v. CIA 355 F.3d 661, 668-70 (D.C.Cir.2004). Moreover, the district court did not abuse its discretion in denying reconsideration of the dismissal of the case. See Firestone v. Firestone, 76 F.3d 1205, 1208 (D.C.Cir.1996).
Pursuant to D.C. Circuit Rule 36, this disposition will not be published.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.