No. 07-5292.United States Court of Appeals, District of Columbia Circuit.
Filed On: September 8, 2008.
BEFORE: Sentelle, Chief Judge, and Griffith and Kavanaugh, Circuit Judges.
Per Curiam
ORDER
Upon consideration of the motion for summary affirmance; this court’s order filed March 14, 2008, and the response thereto; and the motion for reconsideration and the opposition thereto, 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 TaxpayersWatchdog, Inc. v. Stanley, 819 F.2d 294, 297 (D.C. Cir. 1987) (per curiam). The district court properly determined that the Department of the Navy conducted an adequate search for documents responsive to the appellant’s Freedom of Information Act request. See Weisberg v. U.S. Dep’t ofJustice, 705 F.2d 1344, 1351 (D.C. Cir. 1983). Appellant has not provided sufficient evidence to raise “substantial doubt” concerning the adequacy of the search. SeeIturralde v. Comptroller of the Currency, 315 F.3d 311, 314 (D.C. Cir. 2003) (internal quotation omitted). It is
FURTHER ORDERED that the motion for reconsideration be denied.
Pursuant to D.C. Circuit Rule 36, this disposition will not be published.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.
Page 1