No. 07-7020.United States Court of Appeals, District of Columbia Circuit.
Filed On: August 8, 2007.
BEFORE: Sentelle, Rogers, and Brown, Circuit Judges
Upon consideration of the court’s order, filed June 6, 2007, to show cause why the district court’s orders should not be summarily affirmed, the response thereto, and the reply, it is
ORDERED that the order to show cause be discharged. It is
FURTHER ORDERED, on the court’s own motion, that the district court’s orders filed January 5, 2007, denying appellant’s motion to reopen the case, and January 22, 2007, denying appellant’s motion for reconsideration thereof, be summarily affirmed. The merits of the parties’ positions are so clear as to warrant summary action. See TaxpayersWatchdog, Inc. v. Stanley, 819 F.2d 294, 297 (D.C. Cir. 1987) (per curiam). The district court did not abuse its discretion in denying either the motion to reopen or the motion for reconsideration. See Wilson v. Good HumorCorp., 757 F.2d 1293, 1300 (D.C. Cir. 1985) (appellate courts generally loath to overturn trial court’s decision declining to reopen trial proceedings in absence of rare abuse of discretion).
Pursuant to D.C. Circuit Rule 36, this disposition will not be published.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.