Brooks v. Harris
This text of Brooks v. Harris (Brooks v. Harris) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering District Court, District of Columbia primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Opinion
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
) MARCUS DOMINIC BROOKS, ) ) Plaintiff, ) ) v. ) Civil Action No. 10-1993 (JEB) ) HARRIS, et al. ) ) Defendants. ) )
MEMORANDUM OPINION
Plaintiff filed this action in the Superior Court of the District of Columbia against, among
other Defendants, West Virginia State Trooper Kevin Plumer and Special Agents Lockhart and
Dean of the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives (“ATF Defendants”). After
removal of the case to this Court, Plumer and the ATF Defendants have separately filed Motions
to Dismiss, alleging, inter alia, lack of personal jurisdiction, improper venue, and lack of subject
matter jurisdiction. The Court ordered Plaintiff to respond to these motions on or before March
15, 2011, and warned Plaintiff that failure to timely respond could result in these motions being
granted as conceded. The Court later extended the date by which this response was due to April
15, 2011. To date, Plaintiff has not filed any response.
Under Local Rule 7(b), the Court may grant as conceded motions to which Plaintiff files
no response, and such a ruling is appropriate here. Not only has Plaintiff failed to respond or
offer any reason for such failure, but Defendants have strong arguments on the merits. For
example, the Court has no personal jurisdiction over Plumer where all of the acts complained of
occurred in West Virginia, and he has no ties, general or specific, to the District of Columbia. Similarly, the ATF Defendants point out that they are not proper parties in their official capacity,
the Court has no jurisdiction over them in their personal capacity, and the statute of limitations
bars the suit.
As a result, the Court will grant the Motions. A separate Order consistent with this
Memorandum Opinion shall issue this date.
/s/ JAMES E. BOASBERG DATE: June 1, 2011 United States District Judge
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
Brooks v. Harris, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/brooks-v-harris-dcd-2011.