J.M. v. Rhee ( 2010 )


Menu:
  •                          UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
    FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
    J.M. et al.,                               )
    )
    Plaintiffs,                 )
    )
    v.                          )       Civ. Action No. 09-1769 (RJL)
    )
    RHEE et al.,                               )
    )
    Defendants.                 )
    MEMORANDUM           OPI~
    (April ~20 10) [#2]
    ORDER
    Plaintiff, J.M., brought this action against defendants Michelle Rhee ("Rhee"), Kerri
    Briggs ("Briggs"), and the District of Columbia, seeking monetary and injunctive relief under
    the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act, 20 U .S.C. §§ 1400 et seq ("IDEA").
    Presently before the Court is defendants' Motion to Dismiss individual defendants Rhee and
    Briggs, claiming that the complaint fails to identify any specific actions by or request relief
    from individual defendants Rhee and Briggs. Forthe following reasons, the Court GRANTS
    defendants' motion to dismiss.
    Local Rule of Civil Procedure 7(b) provides that an opposing party has 14 days to file
    a memorandum in opposition to the motion and if such party fails to do so, the court may
    treat the motion as conceded. LCvR 7(b). This rule is a "docket-management tool that
    facilitates efficient and effective resolution of motions by requiring the prompt joining of
    issues." Fox v. American Airlines, Inc., 
    389 F.3d 1291
    , 1294 (D.C. Cir. 2004). In Fox, the
    D.C. Circuit affirmed the District Court's holding that "because the plaintiffs failed to
    respond to the defendant's ... motion, the court treats the motion as conceded and grants the
    motion." Jd. (citations omitted). Whether to treat the motion as conceded under Local Rule
    of Civil Procedure 7(b) is highly discretionary; and our Circuit Court has noted that "where
    the district court relies on the absence of a response as a basis for treating the motion as
    conceded, [the D.C. Circuit will] honor its enforcement of the rule." Twelve John Does v.
    District of Columbia, 
    117 F.3d 571
    ,577 (D.C. Cir. 1997).
    In light of the fact that plaintiff failed to file an opposition to defendants' motion to
    dismiss, the Court will treat defendants' motion as conceded. LCvR 7(b). Therefore, in light
    of the plaintiffs concession and based on a review of the pleadings, the relevant law cited
    therein, and the record, it is hereby
    ORDERED that defendants' Motion to Dismiss Rhee and Briggs from this action
    [#2] is GRANTED.
    SO ORDERED.
    United States District Judge
    2
    

Document Info

Docket Number: Civil Action No. 2009-1769

Judges: Judge Richard J. Leon

Filed Date: 4/16/2010

Precedential Status: Precedential

Modified Date: 10/30/2014