Opinion
No. 11-5142.
Filed: September 26, 2011.
Appeal from the United States District Court of Columbia, 1:10-cv-00899-CKK.
BEFORE: Henderson, Rogers, and Tatel, Circuit Judges.
ORDER
Upon consideration of the motion for summary affirmance, the opposition thereto, and the reply, it is
ORDERED that the motion 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 correctly held that the claims in appellant's first amended complaint and his proposed supplemental complaint were barred by the political question doctrine. See,e.g., Jones v. United States, 137 U.S. 202, 212 (1890);Lin v. United States, 561 F.3d 502, 505-08 (D.C. Cir. 2009).
Pursuant to D.C. Circuit Rule 36, this disposition will not be published.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.