Xiu Sun v. Rudolph Contreras ( 2021 )


Menu:
  •                  United States Court of Appeals
    FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA CIRCUIT
    ____________
    No. 20-5293                                                September Term, 2020
    1:20-cv-00197-EGS
    Filed On: February 17, 2021
    Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints,
    Appellee
    Xiu Jian Sun, The Spiritual Adam,
    Appellant
    v.
    Rudolph Contreras,
    Appellee
    ON APPEAL FROM THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
    FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
    BEFORE:        Katsas and Walker, Circuit Judges, and Sentelle, Senior Circuit
    Judge
    JUDGMENT
    This appeal was considered on the record from the United States District Court
    for the District of Columbia and on the brief filed by appellant. 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 July 16, 2020 be
    affirmed. Appellant has shown no error in the district court’s dismissal of the case for
    lack of subject matter jurisdiction and on the ground that the complaint failed to state a
    claim upon which relief may be granted. See, e.g., Ashcroft v. Iqbal, 
    556 U.S. 662
    , 678
    (2009) (“To survive a motion to dismiss, a complaint must contain sufficient factual
    matter, accepted as true, to ‘state a claim to relief that is plausible on its face.’”)
    (quoting Bell Atl. Corp. v. Twombly, 
    550 U.S. 544
    , 570 (2007)); Tooley v. Napolitano,
    
    586 F.3d 1006
    , 1009 (D.C. Cir. 2009) (“A complaint may be dismissed on jurisdictional
    grounds when it is patently insubstantial, presenting no federal question suitable for
    decision.”) (internal quotation marks omitted).
    United States Court of Appeals
    FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA CIRCUIT
    ____________
    No. 20-5293                                                September Term, 2020
    Pursuant to D.C. Circuit Rule 36, this disposition will not be published.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
    FOR THE COURT:
    Mark J. Langer, Clerk
    BY:     /s/
    Daniel J. Reidy
    Deputy Clerk
    Page 2
    

Document Info

Docket Number: 20-5293

Filed Date: 2/17/2021

Precedential Status: Non-Precedential

Modified Date: 2/17/2021