Karim-Panahi v. Niple

Full title: Parviz Karim-Panahi, Appellant v. Burgess Niple Inc., et al., Appellees

Court: United States Court of Appeals, District of Columbia Circuit

Date published: Feb 8, 2008

No. 06-7169 (D.C. Cir. Feb. 8, 2008)

Opinion

No. 06-7169.

Filed On: February 8, 2008.

BEFORE: Tacha, McConnell and Gorsuch, Circuit Judges.^_

_ Judge Tacha, Judge McConnell, and Judge Gorsuch are judges of the United States Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit, sitting by designation pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 291(a).

Per Curiam.

ORDER

Upon consideration of appellant's motion for appointment of counsel; appellees' motions for summary affirmance, and the opposition thereto; appellant's requests for sanctions, reversal of "all orders," remand "to unbiased judge," and appointment of counsel; and appellees' reply, it is.

ORDERED that appellant's motion and request for appointment of counsel be denied. "With the exception of defendants appealing or defending in criminal cases, appellants are not entitled to appointment of counsel when they have not demonstrated sufficient likelihood of success on the merits." Risley v. Hawk, 108 F.3d 1396, 1396 (D.C. Cir. 1997) (per curiam). It is.

FURTHER ORDERED that the motions for summary affirmance be granted. The merits of the parties' positions are so clear as to warrant summary action. See Taxpayers Watchdog, Inc. v. Stanley, 819 F.2d 294, 297 (D.C. Cir. 1987) (per curiam). The district court did not abuse its discretion in dismissing appellant's case after appellant failed to appear for a status hearing and failed to otherwise prosecute the case. See Fed.R.Civ.P. 41(b); Gardner v. United States, 211 F.3d 1305, 1308 (D.C. Cir. 2000). Appellant's failure to appear was deliberate, without any reasonable justification, and representative of various dilatory acts committed throughout the litigation. See Bomate v. Ford Motor Co., 761 F.2d 713, 714 (D.C. Cir. 1985) ("A Rule 41(b) dismissal is proper if, in view of the entire procedural history of the case, the litigant has not manifested reasonable diligence in pursuing the cause."). It is.

FURTHER ORDERED that appellant's requests for sanctions, reversal of "all orders," and remand "to unbiased judge" be denied.

Pursuant to D.C. Circuit Rule 36, this disposition will not be published.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