
    Steve SHELDEN, Innoventureica, Appellant v. JAMES E. ROGERS LAW SCHOOL, et al., Appellees.
    No. 14-7115.
    United States Court of Appeals, District of Columbia Circuit.
    Jan. 20, 2015.
    Steve Shelden, Innoventureica, Goodyear, AZ, pro se.
    BEFORE: ROGERS, KAVANAUGH, and PILLARD, 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 and other submissions 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 July 24, 2014 be affirmed. Appellant has not shown any error in the district court’s denial of his petition for a writ of mandamus. See generally Gulfstream Aerospace Corp. v. Mayacamas Corp., 485 U.S. 271, 289, 108 S.Ct. 1133, 99 L.Ed.2d 296 (1988).

Pursuant to D.C. Circuit Rule 36, this disposition will not be published.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