Case Information
*1 United States Court of Appeals
F OR T HE D ISTRICT OF C OLUMBIA C IRCUIT
____________ No. 25-5138 September Term, 2025
1:25-cv-00068-UNA Filed On: November 3, 2025 Timothy R. Petrozzi,
Appellant
v.
Redmond K. Barnes, et al.,
Appellees ON APPEAL FROM THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA BEFORE: Millett, Pillard, and Garcia, Circuit Judges
J U D G M E N T
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 and the motion to appoint counsel, it is
ORDERED that the motion to appoint counsel be denied. 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 March 26, 2025 order be affirmed. The district court correctly concluded that the complaint failed to meet the minimal pleading standard set forth in Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 8(a). Appellant’s complaint did not set forth “a short and plain statement of the claim showing that the pleader is entitled to relief,” which is required in order to “give the defendant fair notice of what the . . . claim is and the grounds upon which it rests.” Bell Atl. Corp. v. Twombly, 550 U.S. 544, 555 (2007) (alteration in original) (internal quotation marks omitted).
Pursuant to D.C. Circuit Rule 36, this disposition will not be published.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
United States Court of Appeals
F OR T HE D ISTRICT OF C OLUMBIA C IRCUIT
____________ No. 25-5138 September Term, 2025 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: Clifton B. Cislak, Clerk BY: /s/ Michael C. McGrail Deputy Clerk Page 2