
    Gene E. SMITH, Sr., Appellant v. William K. SUTER, Individual, et al., Appellees.
    No. 08-5411.
    United States Court of Appeals, District of Columbia Circuit.
    Dec. 29, 2008.
    Gene E. Smith, Sr., Las Vegas, NV, pro se.
    Before HENDERSON, BROWN, and KAVANAUGH, 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 the appellant. See Fed. R.App. P. 34(a)(2); D.C.Cir. Rule 34(j). It is

ORDERED AND ADJUDGED that the district court’s order, filed August 29, 2008, be affirmed. Appellant’s complaint in No. 08cv0737 was dismissed because lower courts lack jurisdiction to review decisions of the Supreme Court or to compel Supreme Court clerks to take any action. See Smith v. Supreme Court, No. 08cv0737, 2008 WL 4192688 (D.D.C. Apr. 29, 2008), aff'd No. 08-5171, 2008 WL 5532101 (D.C.Cir. Oct. 10, 2008). Because appellant’s complaint in this case presents the same jurisdictional issue, he is precluded from asserting that the district court has jurisdiction to grant the relief he requests. See GAF Corp. v. United States, 818 F.2d 901, 912 (D.C.Cir.1987) (“The judgment ordering dismissal will ... have preclusive effect as to matters actually adjudicated; it will, for example, preclude relitigation of the precise issue of jurisdiction that led to the initial dismissal.”).

Pursuant to D.C. Circuit Rule 36, this disposition will not be published.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