Nickens v. District of Columbia
This text of Nickens v. District of Columbia (Nickens v. District of Columbia) 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.
Opinion
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
____________________________________ : DEMETRIUS NICKENS, : : v. : Civil Action No. 12-0888 (ESH) : THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA, et al., : ____________________________________:
MEMORANDUM OPINION
On September 4, 2012, defendant District of Columbia filed a motion to dismiss
plaintiff’s complaint for failure to state a claim pursuant to Rule 12(b)(6) of the Federal Rules of
Civil Procedure. (DC’s Mot. to Dismiss, Sept. 4, 2012 [ECF No. 15].) By Order dated
September 5, 2012, the Court advised plaintiff of his obligations under the Federal Rules of Civil
Procedure and the local rules of this Court to respond to the motion, and specifically warned
plaintiff that, if he did not respond to the motion by October 5, 2012, the Court may treat the
motion as conceded. To date, plaintiff neither has filed an opposition to the motion and nor has
requested more time to do so. Accordingly, the Court will grant the District of Columbia’s
motion as conceded.
An Order accompanies this Memorandum Opinion.
/s/ ELLEN SEGAL HUVELLE United States District Judge
Date: October 11, 2012
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
Nickens v. District of Columbia, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/nickens-v-district-of-columbia-dcd-2012.