Daniel Ohanele, Appellant, v. Mohammed Siddigne, 56 F.3d 1531 (D.C. Cir. 1995)

Annotate this Case
US Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit - 56 F.3d 1531 (D.C. Cir. 1995) June 13, 1995

Before: WALD, BUCKLEY, and ROGERS, Circuit Judges.

JUDGMENT

PER CURIAM.


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. The court has determined that the issues presented occasion no need for an opinion. See D.C. Cir. Rule 36(b). It is

ORDERED AND ADJUDGED that the district court's order filed February 17, 1995, be vacated. The court has determined that it cannot affirm the district court's dismissal on any of the grounds stated in that order. It is

FURTHER ORDERED that the case be remanded to the district court to permit the complaint to be served on defendant Siddigne and to allow plaintiff an opportunity to amend the complaint.

The Clerk is directed to withhold issuance of the mandate herein until seven days after disposition of any timely petition for rehearing. See D.C. Cir. Rule 41.

Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.