Kissi v. United States Department of Justice

D.C. Circuit

Kissi v. United States Department of Justice

444 F. App'x 457

CourtCourt of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit

DecidedDecember 28, 2011

DocketNo. 11-5167

StatusPublished

Cited by4 cases

This text of 444 F. App'x 457 (Kissi v. United States Department of Justice) 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

Kissi v. United States Department of Justice, 444 F. App'x 457 (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

ORDERED AND ADJUDGED that the district court’s order filed June 23, 2011, be affirmed. Despite appellant’s assertion to the contrary, the district court issued a memorandum opinion in support of the dismissal order on June 23, 2011. Appellant has not shown that the district court erred in dismissing the complaint on the ground that 18 U.S.C. §§ 1951 and 1957 do not provide a private cause of action. See Cent. Bank of Denver v. First Interstate Bank of Denver, 511 U.S. 164, 190-91, 114 S.Ct. 1439, 128 L.Ed.2d 119 (1994) (refusing to infer a private right of action from a “bare criminal statute”); see also McDonnell Douglas Corp. v. Widnall, 57 F.3d 1162, 1164 (D.C.Cir.1995). Nor has appellant shown that the district court was required to hold a hearing or make findings of fact before dismissing the complaint.

Pursuant to D.C. Circuit Rule 36, this disposition will not be published.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

ORDERED AND ADJUDGED that the district court’s order filed June 23, 2011, be affirmed. Despite appellant’s assertion to the contrary, the district court issued a memorandum opinion in support of the dismissal order on June 23, 2011. Appellant has not shown that the district court erred in dismissing the complaint on the ground that 18 U.S.C. §§ 1951 and 1957 do not provide a private cause of action. See Cent. Bank of Denver v. First Interstate Bank of Denver, 511 U.S. 164, 190-91, 114 S.Ct. 1439, 128 L.Ed.2d 119 (1994) (refusing to infer a private right of action from a “bare criminal statute”); see also McDonnell Douglas Corp. v. Widnall, 57 F.3d 1162, 1164 (D.C.Cir.1995). Nor has appellant shown that the district court was required to hold a hearing or make findings of fact before dismissing the complaint.

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)

444 F. App'x 457, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/kissi-v-united-states-department-of-justice-cadc-2011.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack