Awoke Gebretsadike v. John Does

Opinion

United States Court of Appeals FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA CIRCUIT

____________

No. 24-5240 September Term, 2025 1:24-cv-01248-UNA

Filed On: August 27, 2026 Awoke Gebretsadike,

Appellant

v.

John Does, Executive Branch and Federal Agencies, et al.,

Appellees

ON APPEAL FROM THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA

BEFORE: Katsas, Rao, and Childs, Circuit Judges

JUDGMENT

This appeal was considered on the record from the United States District Court for the District of Columbia and on the brief filed by appellant. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2); D.C. Cir. Rule 34(j). Upon consideration of the foregoing and the motion to appoint counsel, it is

ORDERED that the motion to appoint counsel be denied. In civil cases, appellants are not entitled to appointment of counsel when they have not demonstrated a sufficient likelihood of success on the merits. It is

FURTHER ORDERED AND ADJUDGED that the district court’s order entered on July 24, 2024, be affirmed. Appellant has not adequately asserted any challenge to the district court’s dismissal order and has therefore forfeited any such challenge. See United States ex rel. Totten v. Bombardier Corp., 380 F.3d 488, 497 (D.C. Cir. 2004); see also SEC v. Banner Fund Int’l, 211 F.3d 602, 613 (D.C. Cir. 2000) (asserted but unanalyzed arguments are forfeited); United States ex rel. Davis v. District of Columbia, 793 F.3d 120, 127 (D.C. Cir. 2015) (arguments first raised at oral argument are forfeited).

Pursuant to D.C. Circuit Rule 36, this disposition will not be published.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

United States Court of Appeals FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA CIRCUIT

____________

No. 24-5240 September Term, 2025

of any timely petition for rehearing or petition for rehearing en banc. See Fed. R. App. P. 41(b); D.C. Cir. Rule 41.

Per Curiam

FOR THE COURT: Clifton B. Cislak, Clerk

BY: /s/

Daniel J. Reidy Deputy Clerk

Page 2