
    Joan Frances M. MALONE, Appellant v. UNITED STATES DISTRICT, et al., Appellees.
    No. 10-5409.
    United States Court of Appeals, District of Columbia Circuit.
    Aug. 3, 2011.
    
      Joan Frances M. Malone, Washington, DC, pro se.
    R. Craig Lawrence, U.S. Attorney’s Office, Washington, DC, for Appellees.
    BEFORE: SENTELLE, Chief Judge, and GARLAND and BROWN, 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 November 5, 2010, be affirmed. The district court properly dismissed appellant’s complaint as frivolous, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(E)(1)(B). See Neitzke v. Williams, 490 U.S. 319, 325, 109 S.Ct. 1827, 104 L.Ed.2d 338 (1989). Dismissal was also proper because the complaint failed to meet the minimal pleading requirements under Fed.R.Civ.P. 8(a), which requires “a short and plain statement of the claim showing that the pleader is entitled to relief,” in order to “give the defendant fair notice of what the ... claim is and the grounds upon which it rests.” Bell Atlantic Corp. v. Twombly, 550 U.S. 544, 555, 127 S.Ct. 1955, 167 L.Ed.2d 929 (2007) (internal quotation marks omitted).

Pursuant -to D.C. Circuit Rule 36, this disposition will not be published.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. RApp. P. 41(b); D.C.Cir. Rule 41.  