Bishay v. Saylor

• Court: District Court, District of Columbia
• Decided: October 15, 2025
• Docket: Civil Action No. 2025-3102
• Status: Published

Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA

BAHIG BISHAY,

Plaintiff, Civil Action No. 25-03102 (AHA) v.

FRANK DENNIS SAYLOR, IV, et al.,

Defendants.

Memorandum Opinion

Bahig Bishay filed this action against 22 judicial officers, including U.S. district and circuit

court judges. ECF No. 1. Bishay apparently seeks to relitigate several cases that have been

dismissed and bring claims against the judges who adjudicated those prior cases, despite a prior

order of this court enjoining him “from filing any civil action in this or any other federal court

without first obtaining leave of that court” and meeting several other preconditions. Bishay v.

Harris, 668 F. Supp. 3d 9, 14 (D.D.C. 2023), aff’d, No. 23-5019, 2023 WL 6784306 (D.C. Cir.

Oct. 6, 2023). After the court issued this injunction, Bishay failed to seek leave before filing

another suit in this court, and the court accordingly dismissed the action. Bishay v. McFadden, No.

24-cv-2086, 2024 WL 3581349, at *1 (D.D.C. July 30, 2024), aff’d, No. 24-5197, 2025 WL

289575 (D.C. Cir. Jan. 24, 2025). Because Bishay has yet again failed to satisfy the preconditions

set forth in Bishay v. Harris, this action is dismissed.

As in Bishay v. McFadden, this action also must be dismissed because Bishay’s complaint

alleges conduct performed in the judicial defendants’ judicial capacities, and “judicial officers are immune from suit for their judicial acts.” 2024 WL 3581349, at *1 (citing Atherton v. D.C. Off. of

Mayor, 567 F.3d 672, 682 (D.C. Cir. 2009)).

Accordingly, this action is dismissed with prejudice. Bishay’s outstanding motions are

denied as moot.

A separate order accompanies this memorandum opinion.

AMIR H. ALI United States District Judge

Date: October 15, 2025