ZHAN 252 v. WORLD BANK (2020)

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 and by amici curiae. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2); D.C. Cir. Rule 34(j). Upon consideration of the foregoing, the supplement to appellant's brief, the motion for appointment of counsel, and the motion for leave to file a reply brief as amici curiae, it is

ORDERED that the motion for appointment of counsel be denied. In civil cases, appellants are not entitled to appointment of counsel when they have not demonstrated sufficient likelihood of success on the merits. It is

FURTHER ORDERED that the motion for leave to file a reply brief as amici curiae be denied. It is

FURTHER ORDERED AND ADJUDGED that the district court's order filed November 20, 2019, be affirmed. The district court correctly concluded that it lacked subject matter jurisdiction over this case because appellee is immune under the International Organizations Immunity Act of 1945, 22 U.S.C. § 288a.

Pursuant to D.C. Circuit Rule 36, this disposition will not be published.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