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.
Derrick STORMS, Appellant v. Eric K. SHINSEKI, et al., Appellees
JUDGMENT
This appeal was considered on the record from the United States District Court for the District of Columbia and on the briefs filed by the parties. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2); D.C. Cir. Rule 34(j). It is
ORDERED AND ADJUDGED that the district court's order filed August 6, 2018 be affirmed. Appellant contends that in determining whether to recognize an implied cause of action under Bivens v. Six Unknown Named Agents of Federal Bureau of Narcotics, 403 U.S. 388, 91 S.Ct. 1999, 29 L.Ed.2d 619 (1971), the district court failed to analyze whether special circumstances precluded a Bivens remedy in this case. See Ziglar v. Abbasi, ––– U.S. ––––, 137 S. Ct. 1843, 1857, 198 L.Ed.2d 290 (2017). Contrary to appellant's contention, the district court did in fact conduct this analysis. See Storms v. Shinseki, 319 F. Supp. 3d 348, 354-58 (D.D.C. 2018). And appellant, who offers only unsupported assertions that special circumstances do not preclude a Bivens remedy in this case, has failed to show any other error in the district court's dismissal of the complaint for failure to state a claim. See SEC v. Banner Fund Int'l, 211 F.3d 602, 613-14 (D.C. Cir. 2000) (declining to address an “asserted but unanalyzed” argument) (quoting Carducci v. Regan, 714 F.2d 171, 177 (D.C. Cir. 1983)).
Pursuant to D.C. Circuit Rule 36, this disposition will not be published.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. 18-5294
Decided: September 05, 2019
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)