United States Court of Appeals FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA CIRCUIT ____________ No. 25-5161 September Term, 2024 1:24-cv-01626-SLS Filed On: August 5, 2025 Eeon, A Sole Proprietor and Eeon Foundation, A Sole Proprietorship, Appellants v. United States of America, et al., Appellees

ON APPEAL FROM THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA BEFORE: Katsas, Rao, and Walker, Circuit Judges 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 for reasonable accommodations and suspension of rules, and the motion for other relief styled as an “objection to unauthorized interference and procedural misappropriation,” it is ORDERED that the motion for other relief be denied. Appellant has shown no procedural impropriety in the court’s processing of his appeal. It is FURTHER ORDERED AND ADJUDGED that the district court’s March 20, 2025 order dismissing his case be affirmed. Appellant has shown no error in the district court’s conclusions that appellant failed to provide proof of service and failed to respond to the district court’s order to show cause why the case should not be dismissed. It is FURTHER ORDERED that the motion for reasonable accommodations and suspension of rules be dismissed as moot.

United States Court of Appeals FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA CIRCUIT ____________ No. 25-5161 September Term, 2024

Pursuant to D.C. Circuit Rule 36, this disposition will not be published.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: Clifton B. Cislak, Clerk BY: /s/ Daniel J. Reidy Deputy Clerk

Page 2