# United States Court of Appeals

For the Seventh Circuit Chicago, Illinois 60604

Submitted April 10

, 2019 *

Decided April 11 , 2019

Before

AMY C. BARRETT

, Circuit Judge

MICHAEL B. BRENNAN

, Circuit Judge

MICHAEL Y. SCUDDER

, Circuit Judge

No. 1 8

- 3514

DEBORAH BURNS

, Plaintiff

- Appellant

,

v

.

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, et al.

, Defendant s

- Appellee s

. Appeal from the United States District
Court for the Eastern District of Wisconsin

.

No. 1 8

- C

- 1031

Lynn Adelman

, Judge

.

O R D E R

Deborah Burns filed this suit against two sets of defendants. First, she has sued
the United States and unidentified j urors for their role in her federal drug conviction in
1990 . She also has sued unnamed persons at the federal Bureau of Prisons for injuring
her over a dozen years ago

. The district court dismissed her complaint . Because the
defendants are either immune or the claims against them are time

- barred, w e affirm

.

* The defendants were not served in the district court and are not participating on appeal. We have agreed to decide this case without oral argument because the brief and record adequately present the facts and legal arguments, and oral argument would not significantly aid the court. F ED

. R. A PP

. P. 34(a)(2)(C)

. NONPRECEDENTIAL DISPOSITION To be cited only in accordance with Fed. R. App. P. 32.1No. 1 8

- 3514 Page 2

Burns was convicted in 1990 of a federal controlled

- substance offense. Some 28 years later, she brought this suit against the government, accusing the prosecutor s of
false ly charg ing her and the jur ors of agreeing to imprison her unjustly

. She also allege d
that , over 12 years ago, she was assaulted while in federal custody in Wisconsin and
that she fractured her shoulder in a federal prison in California

.

The district court dismissed the complaint at screening

. S ee 28 U.S.C. § 1915. The

court explained that the federal prosecutors and jurors were immune from sui t, the
other defendants were im properly joined , and in any case the claims were legally
deficient.

On appeal, Burns first argues that the district court erred in concluding that the federal prosecutors and jurors are immune from suit

. T hose “ who perform functions closely associated with the judicial process ” are absolutely immun e for acts taken during that process. Cleavinger v. Saxner , 474 U.S. 193, 199

– 200 (1985). This immunity

covers prosecutors and jurors. See id .; Thomas v. City of Peoria , 580 F.3d 633, 638 ( 7th Cir. 2009). And the United States is protected by sovereign immunity. Lane v. Pena , 518 U.S. 187, 192 (1996)

. T he district cour t thus properly dismissed those claims.

Next, Burns argues generally that the court wrongly dismiss ed her c laims against the remaining defendants for injuri ng her in Wisconsin and California

. We may affirm

“ on any ground contained in the record. ” Brooks v. Ross , 578 F.3d 574, 578 (7th Cir. 2009). Burns has pleaded facts that block recovery bec ause her claims are barred by the
relevant statute s of limitations

. She asserts that she is suing under state law. At the time of the events, the limitations period for personal injury claims in Wisconsin was six

years , W IS

. S TAT . § 893.53 ; Huber v. Anderson , 909 F.3d 201, 207 (7th Cir. 2018) ; and in California, it was two years, C AL

. C.C.P. § 335.1 ; Jackson v. Fong , 870 F.3d 928, 936 ( 9th Cir. 2017)

. Burns allege d that her injuries occurred before 2005

, but she sued in
2018

, at least seven years after the expiration of the longer of these two l imitations period s

. “ Although the statute of limitations is ordinarily an affirmative defense

... a district court may dismiss under Rule 12(b)(6) something that is indisputably time

barred, as this is. ” Small v. Chao , 398 F.3d 894, 898 ( 7th Cir. 2005).

We have considered Burns’ s other arguments and conclude that none has merit.

AFFIRMED