UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS

O3C 258g

Tort Claim under 28
U.S.C. Section 1346 (b)

and 2680(h) Say aa
(0GE SHAUL

Tony Silva,
Plainti£é

Naw Case No.

United States,
MAGISTRATE JUDGE NOLAN

Defendant

wee eevee wn

Tort Claim under 28 U.S.C. § 1346(b) and 28 U.S.C. '§
2680 (h)

JURISDICTION a :

The jurisdiction of this Court arises from title 28

fae
wd
1

U.S.C. Sections 1346(b) and 2680(h) because the subject of
this instant case deals with activities such as the abuse
of process related to the illegal distribution of
Plaintiff's property by the Defendant’s employees in theiz:

official capacity. APR? 2Guy

JURY DEMAND

The Plaintiff will request a trial by jury.

STATEMENT OF THE FACTS/CASE

1) Starting in August 1989, Tony Silva, Plaintiff in

the instant case, entered into a breeding loan


not be neceasary for him to cure the other defects identified at

the outset of this memorandum order.

Milton I. Shadur
Senior United States District Judge
Date: April 24, 2003



Jfaige Ronn (0607)

United States District Court, Northern District of Illinois

Name of Assigned Judge i Sitting Judge if Other
or Magistrate Judge Milton I, Shadur than Assigned Judge
CASE NUMBER 03 C 2582 DATE 4/24/2003
CASE Tony Silva vs, United States
TITLE
{In the following box (a) indicate the party filing the motion, e.g. plaintiff, defendant, 3rd party plaintiff, and (b) state briefly the nature
MOTION: of the motion being presented]
DOCKET ENTRY:
(eb) a Filed motion of [ use listing in “Motion” box above. ]

(2) oO Brief in support of mation duc
(3) oO Answer brief lo motion due, . Reply to answer brief due.
(4) Oo Ruling/Hearing on set for at
(5) oO Status hearing[held/continued to] [set for/re-set for] on set for at
(6) O Pretrial conterence/held/continued to] [set for/re-set for] on set for at .
(7) ao ‘Trial[set for/re-set for] on at
(8) a (Bench/Jury trial] [Hearing] held/continued to 0 at .
(9) o This case is dismissed [with/without] prejudice and without costs(by/agreement/pursuant to]
OFRCP4(m) =O Local Rule 41.1 CLFRCP41(ay(1) OF FROP41{a)(2).
ao [Other docket entry] Enter Memorandum Order. — Both Silva’s Complaint and this action are
dismissed for lack of subject matter jurisdiction. That being the casc, hc has managed to save the $150
filing fee, and it will not be necessary for him to cure the other defects identified at the outset of this
memorandum order.
(ii) @f [For further detail see order attached to the original minute order.]
No notices required, advised in open court. Document
No notices required. Number
oY | Notices muiled by judge’s staf. AR
Notified counsel by telephone,
Docketing to mail notices 7
Y_ | Mail AO 450 form. .
Copy to judge/magistrate judge,

courtroom
deputy’
initials

SN

Date/time received in
central Cigtk's Office

mailing deputy inirits



IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS
EASTERN DIVISION

TONY SILVA, )
)
Plaintiff, )
)
Vv. ) No. 03 C 2582
)
UNITED STATES, ) D
OCKETED
Defendant . ) PR 9 « * 2003

MEMORANDUM ORDER

Tony Silva (“Silva”) has mailed to this District Court's
Clerk's Office the signed original of a Complaint against the
United States, seeking a trial by jury (which under law is
unavailable against the United States as sovereign) and a
judgment for $950,000 in compensatory damages. Although Silva's
submission has several other defects--his failure to pay the $150
filing fee, his failure to tender enough counterparts to provide
for service of process together with copies of the Complaint
itself and his inadvertent omission of page 6 of the
Complaint--another flaw that is fatal to Silva's action requires
this Court to dismiss both the Complaint and this action for lack
of subject matter jurisdiction.

As the Complaint reflects, Silva has previously been

unsuccessful in attempting to proceed before the United sraceggyye
Court of Federal Claims--that Court's dismissal for lack of ee

jurisdiction of the complaint that he had tendered there was

as
affirmed by the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit last Zz



October (No, 02-5080, 51 Fed. Appx. 12, 2002 WL 31260448 (Fed.
Cir. Oct. 9)). At the end of the Federal Circuit's per curiam
opinion, Silva was told:

The proper forum for the requested relief, if
available, is the district courts,

But Silva has not heeded the critical “if available” portion
of that message. As the attached photocopy of the first page of
his current Complaint reflects, he seeks to advance a tort claim
under 28 U.S.C. §§1346(b) and 2680(h).’ But the Federal Tort
Claims Act, of which Section 2680 is a part, establishes as an
essential precondition to bringing any lawsuit based on the
asserted misconduct of federal employees the need to have
presented that claim to the appropriate federal agency and to
have had the claim either denied or not acted upon within a
specified period (see Section 2675). Because Silva has failed to
comply with that precondition to suit, this Court lacks
jurisdiction.?

Accordingly both Silva's Complaint and this action are
dismissed for lack of subject matter jurisdiction. That being

the case, he has managed to save the $150 filing fee, and it will

+ All further references to Title 28's provisions will
simply take the form “Section--.”

2? Because this memorandum order addresses only the subject
of jurisdiction, nothing is said or implied here as to whether
Silva's administrative claim or any ensuing lawsuit would he
timely.