UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
March 5, 2010
VERNON V. HUMBLES, PLAINTIFF,
LEON SWAIN, ET AL., DEFENDANTS.
The opinion of the court was delivered by: John D. Bates United States District Judge
Vernon Humbles, proceeding pro se, has filed a complaint against the Chairman of the D.C. Taxicab Commission, an officer of the Metropolitan Police Department, the Mayor of D.C., and the Office of the D.C. Attorney General. Humbles alleges false arrest under D.C. law, as well as violations of his First and Fifth Amendment rights. Defendants have  moved to dismiss the complaint, or in the alternative for summary judgment. On October 23, 2009, the Court granted Humbles's motion to file an amended complaint, and permitted him forty days to perfect service on defendants. See October 23, 2009 Order [Docket Entry 15], at 2-3. Humbles failed to file an amended complaint in the time allotted by the Court. Accordingly, the Court informed Humbles that he would need to respond to defendants' dispositive motion by January 25, 2010, or the Court could grant defendants' motion as conceded. See January 4, 2010 Order [Docket Entry 16], at 1-2; Neal v. Kelly, 963 F.2d 453 (D.C. Cir. 1992); Fox v. Strickland, 837 F.2d 507 (D.C. Cir. 1988).
Under Local Rule 7(b), when an opposition to a motion has not been filed within fourteen days of the date of service "or at such other time as the Court may direct,... the Court may treat the motion as conceded." Local Rule 7(b); see Malik v. District of Columbia, 574 F.3d 781, 786 (D.C. Cir. 2009). Here, the time for Humbles to oppose defendants' motion has long since passed, and the Court has received no communication from Humbles explaining or excusing his failure to respond.
Accordingly, it is hereby
ORDERED that  defendants' motion to dismiss, or in the alternative for summary judgment is GRANTED as conceded, and the case is DISMISSED.
© 1992-2010 VersusLaw Inc.