TaiLexi AI U.S. Case Law

Ron Nichols v. Robert A. Mosbacher, Secretary of Commerce

Nichols v. Mosbacher, 959 F.2d 1101 (D.C. Cir. 1992)
Download
Format
Include

Star paging (*137) is kept for pin cites.

Court
Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · U.S. Courts of Appeals
Decided
March 26, 1992
Docket
No. 91-5140
Citations
959 F.2d 1101295 U.S. App. D.C. 971992 WL 750421992 U.S. App. LEXIS 24710
Status
Unpublished

Opinion

959 F.2d 1101 295 U.S.App.D.C. 97

NOTICE: D.C. Circuit Local Rule 11(c) states that unpublished orders, judgments, and explanatory memoranda may not be cited as precedents, but counsel may refer to unpublished dispositions when the binding or preclusive effect of the disposition, rather than its quality as precedent, is relevant. Ron NICHOLS, Appellant, v. Robert A. MOSBACHER, Secretary of Commerce, et al.

No. 91-5140.

United States Court of Appeals, District of Columbia Circuit.

March 26, 1992.

Before MIKVA, Chief Judge, and RUTH BADER GINSBURG and BUCKLEY, Circuit Judges.

ORDER

PER CURIAM.

1

Upon consideration of the motion for appointment of counsel, the motion for summary affirmance, the court's order to show cause filed February 28, 1992, and the lack of any response thereto, it is 2

ORDERED that the order to show cause be discharged. It is 3

FURTHER ORDERED that the request for appointment of counsel be denied. Appointment of counsel in a civil action is exceptional and wholly unwarranted when appellant has not demonstrated any likelihood of success on the merits. See D.C. Circuit Handbook of Practice and Internal Procedures 29 (1987). It is 4

FURTHER ORDERED that the motion for summary affirmance be granted substantially for the reasons stated by the district court in its memorandum and order filed March 7, 1991. The merits of the parties' positions are so clear as to justify summary action. See Taxpayers Watchdog, Inc. v. Stanley, 819 F.2d 294, 297 (D.C.Cir.1987) (per curiam); Walker v. Washington, 627 F.2d 541, 545 (D.C.Cir.) (per curiam), cert. denied, 449 U.S. 994 (1980).

5

The Clerk is directed to withhold issuance of the mandate herein until seven days after disposition of any timely petition for rehearing. See D.C.Cir.Rule 15.

How later courts describe this case

No later court has written an explanatory parenthetical about this case yet.

Cited by 0 cases

No case in this database cites this case.

Authorities cited 2

DepthCaseCited by
Taxpayers Watchdog, Inc. v. Stanley, 819 F.2d 294 (D.C. Cir. 1987) 359
Walker v. Washington, 627 F.2d 541 (D.C. Cir. 1980) 223

Keyboard shortcuts

/Focus the search box
j kNext / previous result
EnterOpen the selected result
xAdd / remove the selected result from the download list
n pNext / previous search term in a case
cCopy the citation of the current case
+ −Larger / smaller reading text
?Show this list