King v. Moossy

D.C. Circuit

King v. Moossy

424 F. App'x 11

CourtCourt of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit

DecidedJuly 7, 2011

DocketNo. 10-5381

StatusPublished

This text of 424 F. App'x 11 (King v. Moossy) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

King v. Moossy, 424 F. App'x 11 (D.C. Cir. 2011).

Pincite

Opinion

JUDGMENT

PER CURIAM.

This appeal was considered on the record from the United States District Court for the District of Columbia and on the brief filed by the appellant. See Fed. R.App. P. 34(a)(2); D.C.Cir. Rule 34(j). It is

[12]*12ORDERED AND ADJUDGED that the district court’s order filed November 4, 2010, be affirmed. The district court properly dismissed appellant’s complaint, because a government official’s decision whether to investigate and prosecute a case is within the unreviewable discretion of the Executive Branch. See, e.g., United States v. Nixon, 418 U.S. 683, 693, 94 S.Ct. 3090, 41 L.Ed.2d 1039 (1974); Community for Creative Norir-Violence v. Pierce, 786 F.2d 1199, 1201 (D.C.Cir.1986). It is

FURTHER ORDERED that the motion for injunctive relief and temporary restraining order be dismissed as moot.

Pursuant to D.C. Circuit Rule 36, this disposition will not be published.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 of any timely petition for rehearing or petition for rehearing en banc. See Fed. R.App. P. 41(b); D.C.Cir. Rule 41.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

JUDGMENT

PER CURIAM.

This appeal was considered on the record from the United States District Court for the District of Columbia and on the brief filed by the appellant. See Fed. R.App. P. 34(a)(2); D.C.Cir. Rule 34(j). It is

[12]*12ORDERED AND ADJUDGED that the district court’s order filed November 4, 2010, be affirmed. The district court properly dismissed appellant’s complaint, because a government official’s decision whether to investigate and prosecute a case is within the unreviewable discretion of the Executive Branch. See, e.g., United States v. Nixon, 418 U.S. 683, 693, 94 S.Ct. 3090, 41 L.Ed.2d 1039 (1974); Community for Creative Norir-Violence v. Pierce, 786 F.2d 1199, 1201 (D.C.Cir.1986). It is

FURTHER ORDERED that the motion for injunctive relief and temporary restraining order be dismissed as moot.

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

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

424 F. App'x 11, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/king-v-moossy-cadc-2011.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack