Fernando Fontanez v. FBI

United States Court of Appeals FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA CIRCUIT ____________ No. 21-5077 September Term, 2020 1:21-cv-00203-UNA Filed On: July 7, 2021 Fernando Fontanez, Appellant v. Federal Bureau of Investigation, Appellee ON APPEAL FROM THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA BEFORE: Wilkins and Rao, 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). Upon consideration of the foregoing, the motion to appoint counsel, and the motion to expedite ruling on the motion to appoint counsel, it is ORDERED that the motion to appoint counsel be denied and the motion to expedite be dismissed as moot. In civil cases, appellants are not entitled to appointment of counsel when they have not demonstrated sufficient likelihood of success on the merits. It is FURTHER ORDERED AND ADJUDGED that the district court’s orders filed February 12, 2021, and March 4, 2021 be affirmed. The district court properly dismissed the complaint as frivolous. See 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B); Neitzke v. Williams, 490 U.S. 319, 325 (1989) (explaining that a complaint is frivolous “where it lacks an arguable basis either in law or in fact”). Appellant has not shown any abuse of discretion in the district court’s denial of reconsideration. See Firestone v. Firestone, 76 F.3d 1205, 1208 (D.C. Cir. 1996) (per curiam). Additionally, appellant has not shown that the district court erred in denying him leave to file an amended complaint. See United States ex rel. Totten v. Bombardier Corp., 380 F.3d 488, 497 (D.C. Cir. 2004) (arguments not raised on appeal are forfeited); Hettinga v. United States, 677 F.3d 471, 480 (D.C. Cir. 2012) (per curiam) (“A district court may deny a motion to United States Court of Appeals FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA CIRCUIT ____________ No. 21-5077 September Term, 2020 amend a complaint as futile if the proposed claim would not survive a motion to dismiss.”). Because appellant has shown no basis for the requested relief, his request for an injunction and compensation under the Federal Tort Claims Act, 28 U.S.C. § 2679, is 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 Pursuant to D.C. Circuit Rule 36, this disposition will not be published.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. Per Curiam FOR THE COURT: Mark J. Langer, Clerk BY: /s/ Daniel J. Reidy Deputy Clerk Page 2