FIL ED U.S. COURT OF APPEAL S EL EVENTHCI RCUI T DEC 27, 2010 J OHN L EY CL ERK [DO NOT PUBLISH] IN THE U

NITED STATE S COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE ELE VENTH CIRCUIT

__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ No. 1 0- 11 98 9 Non -Arg um en t Ca le nd ar

__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ D.C. Dock etNo. 4 :0 9- cv -0 01 82 -WT M-GRS JENA PAIGE, ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll l Pl ai nt iff -Ap pe ll an t,
ve rs us UNITED STAT ES AIR FORC E, ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll l Defen da nt -Ap pe ll ee.

__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ App eal fro m

th e Uni te d S ta te s Di st ric t Co urt forth e So ut he rnDis tri ctof Ge or gi a

__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ (Dece m be r 27 , 20 10 ) Befo re CARNES, BAR KETT andMARCUS , Cir cu itJu dg es . PER CURI AM: Je naPai ge , pro ceed in g p ro se, app eal s the di sm is sa l o f he r to rt c la im ag ai ns t th e Uni te d S ta te s o f Am eri ca. Pai ge co nt en ds th atth e Uni te d S tate s was ne gl ig en tin whatsh e arg ue s was he r wro ng fu l t erm in at io n fr om th e Uni te d S ta te s Ai r Fo rce. Altho ug h h er co m

pl ai ntan d b rie f are lar ge ly inc om pr eh en si bl e, li be ral ly
co ns tru in g the m , see H&R Bl oc k E. Ent ers ., Inc . v. Mo rri s, 6 06 F.3d12 85 , 12 88 n.1 (11 th Cir . 20 10 ), sh e ap pe ars to ha ve su edth e Uni te d S ta te s u nd er the Fed eral TortCla im s Act . 28 U.S.C. §§ 13 46 (b ), 24 01 , 26 71 –2 68 0. On e o f th e rea so ns th atth e d is tri ctco urt d is m is se d h er co m pl ai ntwas b ecau se itfou ndth athe r cl ai m is barredby the st atut e o f li m it at io ns inth e FTCA. See 2 8 U.S.C. § 24 01 (b ).

“ A to rt c la im

ag ai ns t the Uni te d S ta te s s ha ll be for ev er b arre d u nl es s i t i s pr es en te d i n wri ti ng to th e ap pr op ria te Fed eral ag en cy withi n two years a fte r su ch cl ai m accrue s . . . .” 28 U.S.C. § 2 40 1( b) . Paig e was term in at edfro m th e Air Fo rce o n J un e 2 , 20 06 . She fir stfil edhe r cl ai m with the Air Fo rce o n M ay 18 , 20 09 , whi chwas d en ie d, an d s he th enfil edth is cla im inth e d is tri ctco urt o n Nov em be r 30 , 20 09 . Becau se he r cl ai m ag ai ns t the Uni te d S ta te s i s d eri ve d fr om he r te rm in at io n fr om

th e AirFo rce, wh ic h t oo k p la ce o n J un e 2 , 20 06 , andsh e d id
no t fi le he r cl ai m

for“ to rts ne gl ig en ce” wi th intwo y ears aft er h er t erm in at io n, h er cl ai m is barred . See 2 8 U.S.C. § 24 01 (b ); s ee al so Ph il li ps v. Un it edSta te s, 2 60 F.3 d 1 31 6, 1 31 7 (“ It i s u nd is pu te d tha t u nd er s ect io n 2 40 1( b) , a to rt c la im m us t b e pr es en te d t o the ap pr op ria te fed eral ag en cy withi n two years a fte r th e cl ai m
accrue s . . . .”).
2Pai ge arg ue s tha t a No rth Dako tast atut e o f li m it at io ns sh ou ldgo ve rnhe r

cl ai m ag ai ns t the Uni te d S ta te s. Gen eral ly, ho wev er, “ a co urt l oo ks to st at e la w to de fin e th e ti m e li m it at io n app li cab le to a fed eral cla im on ly whe n C on gr es s h as fai le d t o p ro vi de a st atut e o f li m it at io ns fora fed eral cau se of a ct io n.” Phi ll ip s, 26 0 F .3dat 1 31 8 (quo ta ti on s an d c it at io ns om it te d) . Becau se Co ng res s h as pr ov id edus with the FTCA’s two y ear s ta tu te of l im it at io ns , we do no t l oo k t o st at e la w forth e li m it at io ns pe rio d. See 2 8 U.S.C. § 24 01 (b ). 1 AFFIRMED.

Paige also filed a “Notice of Motion to Amend J udg ement of Jurisdiction From District 1 Court/ and To Notify

To This Court The Plaintiff’s Attempt To Refill [s ic] P endingComplaint.” Although the body

of her motion is as diffic ult to understand as its title, nothing in it chang es the fac t that her c laim is barre d by the FT CA’s statute of limitations. S ee 28 U .S.C. § 2401(b). There fore her motion, to the extent itis a motion, is denied. 3