Learn About the Law
Get help with your legal needs
FindLaw’s Learn About the Law features thousands of informational articles to help you understand your options. And if you’re ready to hire an attorney, find one in your area who can help.
Eugene Nyambal, Appellant v. Steven T. Mnuchin, in his official capacity as Secretary of the United States Treasury, Appellee
ORDER
Upon consideration of the motion for summary affirmance, the opposition thereto, and the reply, it is
ORDERED that the motion for summary affirmance be granted. The merits of the parties' positions are so clear as to warrant summary action. See Taxpayers Watchdog, Inc. v. Stanley, 819 F.2d 294, 297 (D.C. Cir. 1987) (per curiam). The district court correctly concluded that appellant failed to demonstrate his injury was likely to be redressed by a favorable decision because even if the court were to compel the Secretary of the Treasury to comply with section 7071(c) of the Consolidated Appropriations Act of 2012 by seeking to ensure that the International Monetary Fund (IMF) implements best practices for the protection of whistleblowers from retaliation, that would not make it “ ‘likely, as opposed to merely speculative’ ” that the IMF would actually implement practices that would lead to the adjudication of appellant's retaliation claims. Banner Health v. Price, 867 F.3d 1323, 1334 (D.C. Cir. 2017) (quoting Friends of the Earth v. Laidlaw Envtl. Servs, 528 U.S. 167, 180-81 (2000)); see, e.g., Renal Physicians Ass'n v. Dep't of Health & Human Servs., 489 F.3d 1267, 1274 (D.C. Cir. 2007) (“[S]tanding ․ cannot be founded merely on speculation as to what third parties will do in response to a favorable ruling.”); Talenti v. Clinton, 102 F.3d 573, 578 (D.C. Cir. 1996) (concluding that injury would not be redressed by favorable decision because it was speculative to assume that the Italian government would respond to a suspension of aid by negotiating a resolution of plaintiff's claim).
Pursuant to D.C. Circuit Rule 36, this disposition will not be published.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
A free source of state and federal court opinions, state laws, and the United States Code. For more information about the legal concepts addressed by these cases and statutes visit FindLaw's Learn About the Law.
Docket No: No. 17-5072
Decided: November 08, 2017
Court: United States Court of Appeals, District of Columbia Circuit.
Search our directory by legal issue
Enter information in one or both fields (Required)
Harness the power of our directory with your own profile. Select the button below to sign up.
Learn more about FindLaw’s newsletters, including our terms of use and privacy policy.
Get help with your legal needs
FindLaw’s Learn About the Law features thousands of informational articles to help you understand your options. And if you’re ready to hire an attorney, find one in your area who can help.
Search our directory by legal issue
Enter information in one or both fields (Required)