
    In re Earl A. SMITH, Respondent.
    No. 15-BG-925.
    District of Columbia Court of Appeals.
    Filed Nov. 5, 2015.
    Bar Registration No. 392331, BDN: 180-15.
    BEFORE: BLACKBURNE-RIGSBY, Associate Judge, and NEWMAN and FERREN, Senior Judges.
   ORDER

PER CURIAM.

On consideration of the certified order of the Court of Appeals of Maryland disbarring respondent from the practice of law in that jurisdiction, see Attorney Grievance Comm’n of Maryland v. Smith, 443 Md. 351, 116 A.3d 977 (2015), this court’s August 25, 2015, order directing respondent to show cause why reciprocal discipline should not be imposed, and the statement of Bar Counsel regarding reciprocal discipline, and it appearing that respondent has failed to file either a response to this court’s order to show cause or an affidavit as required by D.C. Bar R. XI, § 14(g), it is

ORDERED that. Earl A. Smith is hereby disbarred from the practice of law in the District of Columbia. See In re Sibley, 990 A.2d 483 (D.C.2010), and In re Fuller, 930 A.2d 194, 198 (D.C.2007) (rebuttable presumption of identical reciprocal discipline applies to all cases in which the respondent does not participate). It is

FURTHER ORDERED that for purposes of reinstatement respondent’s period of disbarment will not begin to run until such time as he files an affidavit that fully complies with the requirements of D.C. Bar R. XI, § 14(g).  