NOTE: This disposition is nonprecedential. 

United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit 

 2009-5130 

STANLEY R. SILER, 

 

 Plaintiff-Appellant, 

v. 

UNITED STATES, 

Defendant-Appellee. 

Stanley R. Siler, of Salem, Oregon, pro se. 

Robert G. Hilton, Trial Attorney, Commercial Litigation Branch, Civil Division, 

United States Department of Justice, of Washington, DC, for defendant-appellee. With 

him on the brief were Tony West, Assistant Attorney General, and John Fargo, Director. 

Appealed from: United States Court of Federal Claims 

Judge Francis M. Allegra 
NOTE: This disposition is nonprecedential. 

United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit 

 

2009-5130 

STANLEY R. SILER, 

Plaintiff-Appellant, 

v. 

UNITED STATES, 

 Defendant-Appellee. 

 Appeal from the United States Court of Federal Claims in 09-CV-167, 

 Judge Francis M. Allegra. 

 __________________________ 

DECIDED: February 2, 2010 

 __________________________ 

Before MAYER, GAJARSA, and LINN, Circuit Judges. 

PER CURIAM. 

 Stanley R. Siler appeals the order of the United States Court of Federal Claims 

dismissing his complaint as barred by the doctrine of res judicata. See Siler v. United 

States, No. 09-167C (Fed. Cl. July 10, 2009). The trial court also held that, even if res

judicata did not apply, the case would still be dismissed for lack of jurisdiction and 

failure to state a claim. We affirm. 

 Along with numerous actions in other courts, Siler has previously filed four 

complaints in the Court of Federal Claims. We affirmed the dismissals of these four 

cases, each of which vaguely alleged that the United States had interfered with Siler’s 
copyrights. His most recent complaint once again implies that the United States has in 

some manner interfered with his copyrights, and argues that the United States courts 

have acted unfairly in adjudicating his prior claims. The complaint also makes several 

allegations of negligence against private individuals based on personal injuries Siler 

allegedly suffered in 1983. 

 As noted by the trial court, Siler’s allegations of negligence and claims against 

private individuals are outside that court’s limited jurisdiction “to render judgment upon 

any claim against the United States founded either upon the Constitution, or any Act of 

Congress or any regulation of an executive department, or upon any express or implied 

contract with the United States, or for liquidated or unliquidated damages in cases not 

sounding in tort.” 28 U.S.C. § 1491(a)(1). Nor does the court have jurisdiction to review 

decisions of other federal courts. Joshua v. United States, 17 F.3d 378, 380 (Fed. Cir. 

1994). 

 Regarding Siler’s copyright allegations, the Court of Federal Claims correctly 

stated that the United States can only be held liable for direct appropriation, not for 

inducing or allowing others to infringe a copyright. Boyle v. United States, 200 F.3d 

1369, 1373 (Fed. Cir. 2000). Siler’s complaint does not allege any facts that would 

show that the government has directly appropriated his copyright and therefore fails to 

state a claim upon which relief could be granted. Cary v. United States, 552 F.3d 1373, 

1376 (Fed. Cir. 2009) (explaining that a complaint must allege “enough facts to state a 

claim to relief that is plausible on its face” to avoid dismissal). 

2009-5130 2
2009-5130 3

Because Siler failed to raise any valid claim over which the Court of Federal 

Claims has jurisdiction, his complaint was appropriately dismissed. We need not reach 

the dismissal based on res judicata.