Feizollahi Lahroudi v. Mayorkas

CourtDistrict Court, District of Columbia
DecidedMay 2, 2014
DocketCivil Action No. 2013-1531
StatusPublished

This text of Feizollahi Lahroudi v. Mayorkas (Feizollahi Lahroudi v. Mayorkas) 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.

Bluebook
Feizollahi Lahroudi v. Mayorkas, (D.D.C. 2014).

Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA

ALI FEIZOLLAHI LAHROUDI,

Plaintiff,

v. Civil Action No. 13-1531 (CKK)

ALEJANDRO N. MAYORKAS, et al.,

Defendants.

MEMORANDUM OPINION (May 2, 2014)

On March 18, 2014, Defendants filed a [7] Motion to Dismiss for Lack of Jurisdiction

Plaintiff’s Complaint (“Motion to Dismiss”). Plaintiff is represented by Counsel. Pursuant to

Local Civil Rule 7(b) and Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 6(d), Plaintiff was required to respond

to Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss by no later than April 4, 2014. As of the date of this Order,

the public docket reflects that Plaintiff has not filed a response to Defendants’ [7] Motion to

Dismiss nor has Plaintiff filed a motion for extension of time to respond to Defendants’ Motion.

Accordingly, the Court shall treat Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss as conceded and dismiss the

case. See LCvR 7(b) (“If such a memorandum is not filed within the prescribed time, the Court

may treat the motion as conceded.”).

/s/ COLLEEN KOLLAR-KOTELLY 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

Bluebook (online)
Feizollahi Lahroudi v. Mayorkas, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/feizollahi-lahroudi-v-mayorkas-dcd-2014.