ORl0lNAt

llntbt @nitr! $rtatts @ourt of frltrul @lsfmg

No. 16-1660C (Pro Se)

Filed: February 22,2017 | Not for Publication

ESTATE OF MATTHEW GRANT et al.

Plaintifl

THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Defendant.

Keywords: Federal Rules of Civil

Procedure; Rules ofthe Court ofFederal

Claims; Default Judgment; RCFC 55;

Subject Matter Jurisdiction.

FILED

FEB 22 2017

U.S. COURT OF

FEDERAL CI.4IMS

Gary Grant, Halifax, NC, Plaintiff Pro Se.

Michael A. Rodriguez, Trial Attomey, Commercial Litigation Branch, Civil Division,

Department of Justice, Washington, DC, for Defendant, with whom were Deborah A. Bynum,

Assistant Director, Robert E. Kirschman, -/r., Director, wfi Chad A. Readler, Actins Assistant

Attomey General.

OPINION AND ORDER

KAPLAN, Judge.

I. Plaintiffs' Motion for Default Judgment

On February 13,2017, Plaintiffs filed a motion for default judgment. Docket No. g.

Plaintiffs allege that seven individual defendants were "served with process on December 19,

2016," and that "[u]nder the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure," each of them was required to file

an answer by Janu aty 6,2017 . Pls.' Mot. for Default J. at 1. The govemment filed a iesponse on

February 17 ,2017 , 

in which it argued that Plaintiffs' motion is "premature," because Rule

12(a)(l)(A) ofthe Rules of the courr of Federal claims (RCFC) provides sixty days for the

govemment to file an answer to a complaint. Def.'s Resp. at 1, Docket No. 10. Additionally, the

govemment asserts that Plaintiffs' motion is meritless because the United States is the onlv

proper defendant in the Court of Federal Claims. Id. at 2.

The RCFC "govem the procedure in the United States court of Federal claims in all

suits." RCFC 1; see also 28 u.s.c. $ 2071 (providing that 'all courts established by Act of

congress may from time to time prescribe rules for the conduct of their businesst: za u.s.c.

$ 2503 (stating that "proceedings ofthe Court of Federal Claims shall be in accordance with such

rules ofpractice and procedure . . . as the court ofFederal claims may prescribe"). Under the
RCFC, the "United States must file an answer to a complaint within 60 days after being served

with the complaint." RCFC l2(axl)(A.).1

Here, Plaintiffs filed their complaint on December 19,2016. Docket No. l. Pursuant to

RCFC 4(c), the date of filing is also the date of service. Accordingly, the govemment's answer

was originally due by February 17,2017. See RCFC 12(a)(1\A). Thus, Plaintiffs' motion, filed

February 13,2017, was premature, and Plaintiffs' allegation that an answer was due by January

6,2077 is incorrect. Moreover, on February 16,2017, the govemment filed a motion seeking an

extension of time within which to file its answer. Docket No. 9. The Court granted that motion

and the govemment's answer is not due until April 18, 2017. Docket No. 11. For these reasons,

Plaintiffs' motion for a default judgment is DENIED.

II. Subject Matter Jurisdiction Over Individual Defendants

The Court may raise subject matter jurisdiction sua sponte at any time. Rick's Mushroom

Serv.. Inc. v. United States , 521 F .3d 133 8, 1346 (Fed. Cir. 2008) (citation omitted); see also

Arbaush v. Y&H Corp., 546 U.S. 500, 506 (2006) (noting that an objection to federal court

subject matter j urisdiction may be raised by a court on its own initiative at any stage in the

litigation). "If the court determines at any time that it lacks subject-matter jurisdiction, the court

must dismiss the action." RCFC 12(h)(3); see also Arbaush, 546 U.S. at50647,514 (stating

that "courts . . . have an independent obligation to determine whether subject-matter jurisdiction

exists, even in the absence of a challenge from any party").

The Court has no jurisdiction over claims against any defendant other than the United

States. See United States v. Sherwood, 312 U.S. 584, 588 (1941) (,[I]fthe relief sought is

against others than the United States the suit as to them must be ignored as beyond the

jurisdiction ofthe court."); Jiron v. United States, 118 Fed. Cl. 190, 198-99 (2014) (,,It is well

settled that the United States is the only proper defendant in the United States Court of Federal

Claims." (quotation omitted)). Therefore, Plaintiffs' claims against all defendants other than the

United States are DISMISSED for lack of subject matter jurisdiction.

CONCLUSION

For the reasons set forth above, Plaintiffs' motion for a default judgment is DENIED and

Plaintiffs' claims against all defendants other than the United States are DiSMISSED without

prejudice.

I In any event, the court notes that Fed. R. civ. p. 12(a)(2) provides that.,[t]he united states . . .

must serve an answer to a complaint . . . within 60 days after service on the United States

attomey."
IT IS SO ORDERED.

ELAINE 

u

D.

Judge