No. 06-7071. Consolidated with 06-7149.United States Court of Appeals, District of Columbia Circuit.
Filed On: February 20, 2007.
BEFORE: Sentelle, Rogers, and Garland, Circuit Judges.
Per Curiam
ORDER
Upon consideration of the orders to show cause filed August 21, 2006 and October 20, 2006, and the responses thereto, it is
ORDERED that the orders to show cause be discharged. It is
FURTHER ORDERED, on the court’s own motion, that the district court’s June 13, 2006 and August 2, 2006 orders be summarily affirmed. The merits of the parties’ positions are so clear as to warrant summary action. SeeTaxpayers Watchdog, Inc. v. Stanley, 819 F.2d 294, 297 (D.C. Cir. 1987) (per curiam). The district court did not abuse its discretion when it denied appellant’s motion to extend the time for noting an appeal and denied reconsideration. See Fed.R.App.P. 4(a)(5); Students AgainstGenocide v. Dep’t of State, 257 F.3d 828, 833 n. 5 (D.C. Cir. 2001). Even if the court were to apply the more flexible approach to “excusable neglect” established in Pioneer Inv. Serv. Co. v. Brunswick Assoc. L.P., 507 U.S. 380, 395 (1993), appellant still has not demonstrated “excusable neglect.” It is
FURTHER ORDERED, on the court’s own motion, that the appeal in No. 06-7071 be dismissed as untimely. Appellant filed his notice of appeal on May 8, 2006, more than thirty days after the April 5, 2006 entry of the challenged order. See Fed.R.App.P. 4(a)(1)(A).
Pursuant to D.C. Circuit Rule 36, this disposition will not be published.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.