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 courts June 29, 2020 order dismissing appellants complaint, and the district courts July 29, 2020 order denying appellants motions to reopen the case and amend the complaint, be affirmed. The district court correctly concluded that the complaint failed to meet the minimum pleading standards of Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 8(a) and Ashcroft v. Iqbal, 556 U.S. 662, 678, 129 S.Ct. 1937, 173 L.Ed.2d 868 (2009). The district court did not abuse its discretion in denying appellants motion to reopen the case and to amend the complaint. See Peyton v. DiMario, 287 F.3d 1121, 1125 (D.C. Cir. 2002) (district courts denial of motion for relief pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 59(e) reviewed for abuse of discretion); Hettinga v. United States, 677 F.3d 471, 480 (district court did not abuse discretion in denying motion to amend complaint where amendment would have been futile).
Pursuant to D.C. Circuit Rule 36, this disposition will not be published.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