U.S. v. Colbert, Pre-Paid Legal Incor

Full title: Antonio COLBERT, Appellant v. PRE-PAID LEGAL INCORPORATED, Appellee

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

Date published: Jan 25, 2011

407 F. App'x 486 (D.C. Cir. 2011)

Opinion

No. 10-7115.

January 25, 2011.

On Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Columbia, No. 1:10-cv-01436-UNA.

Antonio Colbert, Washington, DC, prose.

BEFORE: SENTELLE, Chief Judge, and GARLAND and BROWN, Circuit Judges.

JUDGMENT

PER CURIAM.

This appeal was considered on the record from the United States District Court for the District of Columbia and on the brief filed by the 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 issued August 25, 2010, be affirmed. The district court did not abuse its discretion in dismissing the appellant's complaint without prejudice for failure to comply with Fed.R.Civ.P. 8(a), which requires "a short and plain statement of the claim showing that the pleader is entitled to relief." See Ciralsky v. CIA 355 F.3d 661, 668-71 (D.C. Cir. 2004).

Pursuant to D.C. Circuit Rule 36, this disposition will not be published.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