McKee v. United States Small Business Administration

352 F. App'x 451

• Court: Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit
• Decided: November 4, 2009
• Docket: No. 09-5230
• Status: Published

Opinion

JUDGMENT

PER CURIAM.

This appeal was considered on the record from the United States District Court for the District of Columbia and the brief filed by appellant. See Fed. R.App. P. 34(a)(2); D.C.Cir. Rule 34(j). Upon consideration of these materials and the motion for appointment of counsel, it is

ORDERED that the motion for appointment of counsel be denied. With the exception of defendants appealing or defending in criminal cases, appellants are not entitled to appointment of counsel when they have not demonstrated sufficient likelihood of success on the merits. It is

FURTHER ORDERED AND ADJUDGED that the district court’s order of June 16, 2009, 2009 WL 1686957, be affirmed. The district court properly dismissed this action for lack of standing because appellant did not allege an injury in fact caused by the appellees’ conduct and redressable by the court, which are the “irreducible constitutional minimum” requirements for standing. Lujan v. Defenders of Wildlife, 504 U.S. 555, 560-61, 112 S.Ct. 2130, 119 L.Ed.2d 351 (1992).

Pursuant to D.C. Circuit Rule 36, this disposition will not be published.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