Opinion
No. 08-5152.
Filed On: December 12, 2008.
BEFORE: Henderson, Brown, and Kavanaugh, Circuit Judges.
ORDER
Upon consideration of the motion for summary affirmance, the opposition thereto, and the reply, it is
ORDERED that the motion 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 essential requirements of due process . . . are notice and an opportunity to respond." Cleveland Bd. of Educ. v. Loudermill, 470 U.S. 532, 546 (1985). Appellant was provided adequate notice of the reasons for his termination and an opportunity to respond both in writing and at an administrative hearing where he was represented by counsel. Appellant has also failed to state a substantive due process claim. See Estate of Phillips v. District of Columbia, 455 F.3d 397, 403 (D.C. Cir. 2006) ("To constitute a substantive due process violation, the defendant official's behavior must be `so egregious, so outrageous, that it may fairly be said to shock the contemporary conscience.'" (quoting County of Sacramento v. Lewis, 523 U.S. 833, 847 n. 8 (1998))).
Pursuant to D.C. Circuit Rule 36, this disposition will not be published.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.