Bishay v. McFadden

Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA

_________________________________________

)

BAHIG F. BISHAY, )

)

Plaintiff, )

)

v. )

) Case No. 24-cv-2086 (APM)

TREVOR N. MCFADDEN, et al., ) in his individual capacity, ) U.S. District Court Judge, )

)

Defendants. )

_________________________________________ )

MEMORANDUM OPINION

Plaintiff Bahig F. Bishay filed this action against Defendant U.S. District Court Judge Trevor N. McFadden and 14 judges of the D.C. Circuit. Compl., ECF No. 1. The crux of the Complaint is that Judge McFadden wrongfully dismissed a case that Plaintiff filed against various federal officials and others, Bishay v. Harris, 21-cv-1831 (TNM). See generally id. In the dismissed action, Judge McFadden entered an order enjoining Plaintiff from further filings in federal court absent satisfying various conditions, including seeking leave of court to file a new action. See Bishay v. Harris (Bishay I), 668 F. Supp. 3d 9, 14 (D.D.C. 2023). The D.C. Circuit upheld the injunction. See Bishay v. Harris, No. 23-5019, 2023 WL 6784306, at *1 (D.C. Cir. Oct. 6, 2023). In filing this action, Plaintiff has not satisfied any of the pre-conditions to suit set forth in Judge McFadden’s injunction. Bishay I, 668 F. Supp. 3d at 14. For that reason, this case is dismissed.

The case also must be dismissed for the independent reason that judicial officers are immune from suit for their judicial acts. See Atherton v. D.C. Off. of Mayor, 567 F.3d 672, 682 (D.C. Cir. 2009). Plaintiff only has alleged conduct performed in Defendants’ judicial capacities.

Accordingly, for the foregoing reasons, the court dismisses Plaintiff’s complaint and this action with prejudice. Plaintiff’s various other motions, ECF Nos. 4, 5, and 7, are denied as moot.

A separate final order accompanies this Memorandum Opinion.

Dated: July 30, 2024 Amit P. Mehta United States District Court Judge