NOTE: This disposition is nonprecedential. 

United States Court of Appeals 

for the Federal Circuit 

__________________________ 

STANLEY R. SILER, 

Plaintiff-Appellant, 

v. 

UNITED STATES, 

Defendant- Appellee. 

__________________________ 

2011-5017 

__________________________ 

Appeal from the United States Court of Federal 

Claims in Case No. 10-CV-134, Judge Francis M. Allegra. 

___________________________ 

Decided: April 7, 2011 

___________________________ 

STANLEY R. SILER, of Salem, Oregon, pro se. 

ALEXIS J. ECHOLS, Trial Attorney, Commercial Litigation Branch, Civil Division, United States Department of 

Justice, of Washington, DC, for defendant-appellee. With 

her on the brief were TONY WEST, Assistant Attorney 

General, JEANNE E. DAVIDSON, Director, and DONALD E.

KINNER, Assistant Director. 

__________________________ 
SILER v. US 2

Before BRYSON, MOORE, and O’MALLEY, Circuit Judges. 

PER CURIAM. 

Stanley R. Siler appeals from an order of the United 

States Court of Federal Claims dismissing his complaint, 

in which he alleged copyright infringement by the United 

States. 

In a previous case, the Court of Federal Claims dismissed a similar action brought by Mr. Siler as barred by 

res judicata and for failure to state a claim upon which 

relief could be granted. Siler v. United States, No. 09-167 

(Fed. Cl. July 10, 2009), aff’d, 363 F. App’x 750 (Fed. Cir. 

2010). In its order disposing of that case the court noted 

that Mr. Siler had filed numerous similar actions, including four different actions in the Court of Federal Claims 

asserting copyright infringement. In light of the numerous and redundant actions filed by Mr. Siler, the court 

directed Mr. Siler to obtain advance written permission 

from the court before filing any actions relating to the 

allegations raised in that case. 

Notwithstanding the trial court’s order in that case, 

Mr. Siler filed this action without seeking or obtaining 

advance written permission from the court. The court 

found that the allegations in this case are similar to those 

made in Mr. Siler’s earlier dismissed complaints. The 

court therefore dismissed the complaint. 

Mr. Siler has not challenged the propriety of the trial 

court’s earlier order requiring him to obtain written 

permission to file any new action relating to the subject 

matter of his previous copyright infringement complaints. 

Nor has he suggested that he complied with that order or 

attempted to comply with it. We conclude that the trial 

court acted lawfully in requiring Mr. Siler to obtain 
3 SILER v. US

advance written permission to file new actions relating to 

the same subject matter, particularly in light of his practice of repeatedly raising the same claims in successive 

actions. See Siler v. United States, No. 08-099, 2008 WL 

1991170, at *1-2 (Fed. Cl. Mar. 6, 2008) (collecting cases), 

aff’d, 296 F. App’x. 32 (Fed. Cir. 2008). Mr. Siler’s complaint in this case was clearly related to the subject 

matter of his prior actions, and his act of filing that 

complaint without obtaining prior permission from the 

court therefore plainly violated the court’s earlier order. 

Accordingly, we uphold the order of the Court of Federal 

Claims dismissing Mr. Siler’s complaint. 

AFFIRMED