From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Yelder v. Gates

United States Court of Appeals, District of Columbia Circuit
Dec 28, 2010
No. 10-5285 (D.C. Cir. Dec. 28, 2010)

Opinion

No. 10-5285.

Filed On: December 28, 2010.

BEFORE: Ginsburg, Tatel, and Brown, Circuit Judges


ORDER

Upon consideration of the motion for summary affirmance and the opposition thereto, 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). Appellant has not shown any error in the district court's dismissal of her Title VII, due process, and defamation claims as barred by res judicata, see,e.g., Smalls v. United States, 471 F.3d 186, 192 (D.C. Cir. 2006), nor has she shown that the court abused its discretion in dismissing her remaining claims as conceded under Local Civil Rule 7(b). See,e.g., Fox v. American Airlines, Inc., 389 F.3d 1291, 1294 (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Pursuant to D.C. Circuit Rule 36, this disposition will not be published.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.


Summaries of

Yelder v. Gates

United States Court of Appeals, District of Columbia Circuit
Dec 28, 2010
No. 10-5285 (D.C. Cir. Dec. 28, 2010)
Case details for

Yelder v. Gates

Case Details

Full title:Gloria Dean Yelder, Appellant v. Robert M. Gates, Secretary of Defense, et…

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

Date published: Dec 28, 2010

Citations

No. 10-5285 (D.C. Cir. Dec. 28, 2010)

Citing Cases

Ashbourne v. Hansberry

mem.) (affirming that res judicata barred a Title VII retaliation claim where all alleged factual predicates…