May Chen v. Manufacturers & Traders Trust Company

• Court: Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit
• Decided: October 20, 2025
• Docket: 25-7068
• Status: Unpublished

Opinion

United States Court of Appeals FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA CIRCUIT ____________ No. 25-7068 September Term, 2025 1:24-cv-03620-UNA Filed On: October 20, 2025 May Chen,

Appellant

v.

Manufacturers & Traders Trust Company, et al.,

Appellees

ON APPEAL FROM THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA

BEFORE: Millett, Pillard, and Rao, Circuit Judges

JUDGMENT

This appeal was considered on the record from the United States District Court for the District of Columbia and on the brief and appendix filed by appellant. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2); D.C. Cir. Rule 34(j). Upon consideration of the foregoing, the motions for default judgment, and the motion to expedite, it is

ORDERED that the motions for default judgment be denied. It is

FURTHER ORDERED AND ADJUDGED that the district court’s order filed April 2, 2025, be affirmed. The district court correctly concluded that appellant’s complaint did not set forth “a short and plain statement of the grounds for the court’s jurisdiction” or “a short and plain statement of the claim showing that the pleader is entitled to relief,” Fed. R. Civ. P. 8(a), which is required in order to “give the defendants fair notice of what the claim is and the grounds upon which it rests,” Jones v. Kirchner, 835 F.3d 74, 79 (D.C. Cir. 2016) (quoting Bell Atl. Corp. v. Twombly, 550 U.S. 544, 555 (2007)). The district court also correctly held that appellant “lacks a judicially cognizable interest in the prosecution” of appellees. In re Kaminski, 960 F.2d 1062, 1064 (D.C. Cir. 1992) (per curiam) (quoting Linda R.S. v. Richard D., 410 U.S. 614, 619 (1973)). It is

FURTHER ORDERED that the motion to expedite be dismissed as moot. United States Court of Appeals FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA CIRCUIT ____________ No. 25-7068 September Term, 2025

Pursuant to D.C. Circuit Rule 36, this disposition will not be published.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

Per Curiam

FOR THE COURT: Clifton B. Cislak, Clerk

BY: /s/ Daniel J. Reidy Deputy Clerk

Page 2