Court Opinion

ID: 9386103
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-04-11 15:01:03.399048+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T17:17:44.499838
License: Public Domain

United States Court of Appeals
                               FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA CIRCUIT
                                        ____________
No. 23-5024                                                   September Term, 2022
                                                                        1:22-cv-03742-UNA
                                                         Filed On: April 10, 2023
Patrick O. Christian,

              Appellant

       v.

United States of America, et al.,

              Appellees

            ON APPEAL FROM THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
                      FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA

       BEFORE:          Pillard and Childs, Circuit Judges, and Sentelle, Senior Circuit
                        Judge

                                       JUDGMENT

        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 January 4, 2023 and
January 19, 2023 orders be affirmed. The district court correctly concluded that
appellant’s complaint, which lacked an arguable basis either in law or in fact, was
frivolous. See Neitzke v. Williams, 490 U.S. 319, 325 (1989); see also 28 U.S.C.
§ 1915(e)(2)(B)(i) (providing that “the court shall dismiss the case at any time if the
court determines that . . . the action or appeal . . . is frivolous or malicious”). And the
district court did not abuse its discretion in denying appellant’s motion for post-judgment
relief under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 59(e). See, e.g., Ciralsky v. CIA, 355 F.3d
661, 668 (D.C. Cir. 2004).
                 United States Court of Appeals
                            FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA CIRCUIT
                                     ____________
No. 23-5024                                                September Term, 2022

        Pursuant to D.C. Circuit Rule 36, this disposition will not be published.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

                                                         FOR THE COURT:
                                                         Mark J. Langer, Clerk

                                                 BY:     /s/
                                                         Michael C. McGrail
                                                         Deputy Clerk

                                          Page 2