
    Tyrone HURT, Appellant v. UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR the DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA, Appellee.
    No. 06-5250.
    United States Court of Appeals, District of Columbia Circuit.
    Oct. 30, 2006.
    Tyrone Hurt, Washington, DC, pro se.
    R. Craig Lawrence, Assistant U.S. Attorney, U.S. Attorney’s Office, Washington, DC, for Defendant-Appellee.
    Before: GINSBURG, Chief Judge, and ROGERS 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 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 22, 2006, be affirmed. The district court properly dismissed the complaint sua sponte under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e), because the allegations lack an arguable basis either in law or fact. See Neitzke v. Williams, 490 U.S. 319, 325, 109 S.Ct. 1827, 104 L.Ed.2d 338 (1989); Crisafi v. Holland, 655 F.2d 1305 (D.C.Cir.1981).

Pursuant to D.C. Circuit Rule 36, this disposition will not be published.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