Nicholas Woodall v. Donald Trump

United States Court of Appeals FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA CIRCUIT ____________ No. 25-5259 September Term, 2025 1:25-cv-00112-UNA Filed On: February 24, 2026 Nicholas Woodall, Appellant v. Donald J. Trump, President, et al., Appellees

ON APPEAL FROM THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA BEFORE: Millett, Pan, and Garcia, 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, and the motion for leave to amend his brief, it is ORDERED that the motion for leave to amend the brief be granted. The Clerk is directed to file appellant’s lodged brief and lodged supplemental appendix. It is FURTHER ORDERED AND ADJUDGED that the district court’s June 17, 2025 order dismissing appellant’s complaint be affirmed. The district court did not err in treating appellant’s amended complaint – which was prepared using the district court’s civil complaint form, alleged injuries to appellant’s interests, and requested various forms of injunctive relief – as a civil complaint. The district court correctly concluded that the complaint failed to satisfy the pleading standard set forth in Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 8(a), because it did not contain “a short and plain statement of the grounds for the court’s jurisdiction” or “a short and plain statement of the claim showing that [appellant] is entitled to relief.” To the extent that Mr. Woodall now argues that his filing was only a "request for communication and to debate the merit of the matters United States Court of Appeals FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA CIRCUIT ____________ No. 25-5259 September Term, 2025 presented," this court's jurisdiction is constitutionally limited to actual "cases" or "controversies." U.S. Const., Art. III, § 2.

Pursuant to D.C. Circuit Rule 36, this disposition will not be published.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