Waker v. Brown

Full title: JOSEPH R. WAKER, JR., Plaintiff, v. DEVON BROWN et al., Defendants

Court: United States District Court, D. Columbia

Date published: Mar 3, 2011

Civil Action No. 10-0658 (PLF) (D.D.C. Mar. 3, 2011)

Opinion

Civil Action No. 10-0658 (PLF).

March 3, 2011

MEMORANDUM OPINION

PAUL FRIEDMAN, District Judge

Pending before the Court is the motion of the remaining defendant, the District Columbia, to dismiss the complaint. See Order of December 9, 2010 (dismissing the complaint against the individual defendants). By Order of January 6, 2011, plaintiff, proceeding pro se, was advised consistent with Fox v. Strickland, 837 F.2d 507 (D.C. Cir. 1988), about his obligation to respond to the District of Columbia's motion by February 7, 2011, or risk dismissal of the complaint on a conceded motion. Plaintiff has neither filed a response nor sought additional time to do so. The Court therefore will treat the pending motion as conceded and will now dismiss the case. A separate Order accompanies this Memorandum Opinion.

DATE: March 3, 2011