Court Opinion

ID: 9389810
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-04-26 15:01:45.772676+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T17:18:30.454314
License: Public Domain

United States Court of Appeals
                            FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA CIRCUIT
                                        ____________
No. 22-5257                                                September Term, 2022
                                                                      1:22-cv-00575-UNA
                                                       Filed On: April 26, 2023
Karl Ray Masek,

              Appellant

       v.

Rob Isonta, Attorney General, 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 July 29, 2022 order be
affirmed. The district court did not abuse its discretion by dismissing the case without
prejudice after appellant twice failed to comply with court orders that he file a compliant
amended complaint. See Ripalda v. Am. Operations Corp., 977 F.2d 1464, 1466 (D.C.
Cir. 1992). Although appellant has attached to his brief a proposed amended
complaint, he did not file this complaint in district court and has not explained why he
could not have timely done so.
                 United States Court of Appeals
                            FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA CIRCUIT
                                     ____________
No. 22-5257                                                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        Pursuant to D.C. Circuit Rule 36, this disposition will not be published.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/
                                                         Daniel J. Reidy
                                                         Deputy Clerk

                                          Page 2