Court Opinion

ID: 9953707
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2024-03-22 18:00:56.824788+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T08:03:58.152360
License: Public Domain

United States Court of Appeals
                             FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA CIRCUIT
                                       ____________
No. 23-5099                                                 September Term, 2023
                                                                         1:23-cv-00351-UNA
                                                       Filed On: March 22, 2024
Merlin Lkent Williams,

              Appellant

       v.

Jacob Levitan,

              Appellee

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

       BEFORE:        Henderson, Millett, and Walker, Circuit Judges

                                      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 order filed February 24,
2023 be affirmed. The district court correctly concluded that it lacks authority to compel
the Supreme Court Clerk’s Office to take any action or to compel the Supreme Court to
take any action against an employee of the Clerk’s Office. See In re: Marin, 956 F.2d
339, 340 (D.C. Cir. 1992) (per curiam) (stating that the Supreme Court has “exclusive”
supervisory responsibility over its Clerk, and “neither a district court nor a circuit court of
appeals has jurisdiction to interfere with it by mandamus or otherwise”). Additionally,
the district court correctly concluded that the Supreme Court Clerk’s Office employee is
immune from appellant’s suit for damages. See Sindram v. Suda, 986 F.2d 1459, 1460
(D.C. Cir. 1993) (“[C]lerks, like judges, are immune from damage suits for performance
of tasks that are an integral part of the judicial process.”).
                 United States Court of Appeals
                            FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA CIRCUIT
                                     ____________
No. 23-5099                                                September Term, 2023

        Pursuant to D.C. Circuit Rule 36, this disposition will not be published.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