Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-casd-3_11-cv-00835/USCOURTS-casd-3_11-cv-00835-0/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 360
Nature of Suit: Other Personal Injury
Cause of Action: 28:1442 Petition for Removal

---

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

- 1 - 11CV835

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

VICTORIA NGUYEN,

Plaintiff,

CASE NO. 11CV835 JLS (BGS)

ORDER GRANTING

DEFENDANTS’ MOTION TO

DISMISS

(ECF No. 7.) 

vs.

DAVID SKELTON, IRENE JOSE, and

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Defendants.

Presently before the Court is Defendants Irene Jose and United States of America’s motion

to dismiss. (ECF No. 7.) Also before the Court are Plaintiff Victoria Nguyen’s opposition, (ECF

No. 10), and Defendants’ reply, (ECF No. 11). The Court finds the motion suitable for

determination on the papers without oral argument, pursuant to Civil Local Rule 7.1.d.1. After

consideration, the Court GRANTS Defendants’ motion to dismiss.

Plaintiff brings suit against Irene Jose, an employee of the United States Postal Service, for

professional negligence. (ECF No. 1-1 at 8.) The suit is framed by Plaintiff’s bankruptcy

proceedings. During late 2010 through early 2011, Plaintiff was undergoing the bankruptcy

process. And this process required Plaintiff to keep track of her mail. 

Plaintiff alleges that Defendant Jose had something to do with Plaintiff’s mail being lost. 

To the best of this Court’s understanding, the lost mail caused Plaintiff’s bankruptcy matter to end

without her debts being discharged, requiring Plaintiff to repeat the bankruptcy process. Plaintiff

sues to recover “the cost of [her] Chapter 7 attorney, [her] court fee and / or [her] creditor bills.” 

(Id. at 5.) 

Case 3:11-cv-00835-JLS-BGS Document 12 Filed 08/31/11 Page 1 of 2
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

- 2 - 11CV835

Defendant Jose removed the case to this Court on April 20, 2011. One day later, the

Assistant U.S. Attorney filed a certification of scope of employment indicating that Defendant Jose

“was acting within the scope of her employment as an employee of the United States Postal

Service with regard to the events described in the Plaintiff’s Complaint.” (ECF No. 3.) 

Given the certification, the Court notes that the United States is the proper defendant here. 

Under 28 U.S.C. § 2679(d)(1), the United States was substituted as the party defendant. And to

the extent that Plaintiff wishes to replace the United States with Irene Jose, Plaintiff fails to make a

showing by a preponderance of the evidence. Pauly v. U.S. Dept. of Agri., 348 F.3d 1143,

1150–51 (9th Cir. 2003). Thus, this action proceeds as one against the United States.

“The FTCA [Federal Tort Claims Act] is the exclusive remedy for tortious conduct by the

United States.” F.D.I.C. v. Craft, 157 F.3d 697, 706 (9th Cir. 1998). Plaintiff’s negligence claim

proceeds, therefore, under the watchful eye of the FTCA. 

The FTCA “provides that an ‘action shall not be instituted upon a claim against the United

States for money damages’ unless the claimant has first exhausted administrative remedies.” 

Vacek v. U.S. Postal Service, 447 F.3d 1248, 1250 (9th Cir. 2006). Plaintiff here has failed to

allege any facts indicating that she exhausted her administrative remedies. And because the FTCA

“exhaustion requirement is jurisdictional in nature and must be interpreted strictly,” Plaintiff’s

failure to exhaust means that this Court has no jurisdiction to hear her claim. Id. 

For the reasons stated above, the Court GRANTS Defendants’ motion to dismiss. (ECF

No. 3.) Plaintiff may file an amended complaint within 21 days of this Order being electronically

docketed. 

IT IS SO ORDERED.

DATED: August 31, 2011

Honorable Janis L. Sammartino

United States District Judge

Case 3:11-cv-00835-JLS-BGS Document 12 Filed 08/31/11 Page 2 of 2