T hi s di s pos i t i on i s notappr opr i a t e f orpubl i c a t i on and i s notpr e c e de nt * e xc e pta s pr ovi de d by9th C i r . R . 36- 3.

T he pa ne l una ni m ous l yc onc l ude s thi s c a s e i s s ui t abl e f orde c i s i on ** w ith o u t o r a l ar g u m e n t. See F ed. R . A pp . P . 34 (a )( 2). 07-16032 NOT F OR P UB L I CAT I ON UN I TE D STATE S C OU RT OF APPE ALS FOR T HE NI NTH CI RC UI T FR EDER I CK KA RL J OST, P la in tif

f - A p p e llan t, v. U . S. PO STA L SERV I CE an dU . S. PO STM A STER, D efen d an t s - A p p el l ees. N o. 07- 16032 D . C . N o . C V - 0 5 - 0 1 3 6 0 - A WI ME MOR AN DU M *

A pp ea l fr om the U ni t ed S t at es D i stri ctC ou rt f o rth e E a s te rn D is tr ic t o f C a lif o rn ia A nthonyW . I s hi i , C hi e f Judge , P r e s i di ng S ubm i tt e d J anua ry10, 2011 ** B efo re: B E E Z E R , T A L L M A N an dC A L L A H A N , C i rcu i tJu d g es. F r e de r i c k K a r l J os t , aC a l i f orni as t a t e pr i s one r , appe a l s pr o s e f r om the di stri ctcourt ’ s j ud gm entdi sm i ss i ng hi s c om pl ai ntun der Bi v e n s v . S i xU n kn o wn N am ed A gent

s of FederalB ureau o

f N arcot i cs , 403 U . S . 388 (197 1) al l egi ng that



# FI LED JAN 25 2 011 M OLLY C. DW Y ER, CLERK U . S. C O U R T OF APPE ALS07-16032 2 th e U n ite dS ta te s P o s ta l S e rv ic e lo s t th e c o n te n ts o f ap a c k a g e th a t J o s t h a dm a ile d . W e h av e ju risd icti o n u n d er2 8 U .S .C . § 1 2 9 1 . W e r ev iew d e n o v o a d istrict co u rt’s d is m is s a l f

o rf a ilu r e to s ta te ac la im u n d e r2 8 U .S .C . § 1 9 1 5 A , R es ni ck v. H ayes , 213 F . 3d 443, 447 ( 9th C i r . 2000) a nd f ora n abus e of

di s c r e t i on i t s de ni a l of

l e a ve to a m e n d , H

ale t v . W e nd I nv . C o. , 6 7 2 F .2 d1 3 0 5 , 1 3 1 0 ( 9 th C ir . 1 9 8 2 ) . W e a f f i rm. T he di s tr i c tc ourtpr ope r l ydi s m i s s e d J os t ’ s a c t i on be c aus e the de pr i va t i on J o s t a lle g e s — th e lo s s o f h is m a il — d o e s n o t r is e to ac o n s titu tio n a l v io la tio n . Se e Cn ty . o

f Sa c ra m e n to v . L e w is , 523 U . S . 833, 848- 49 ( 1998) ( “ [ T ] he C on st i tut i on do es no tgu ar ant ee du e c ar e on the partof st at e off i ci al s; l i abi l i ty f

or negl i gent l y i nfl i ct ed harm i s c at egori ca l l y benea th the thres ho l d o f c on st i tut i on al du e p r o c e s s .” ) ; H

a rtm a n v. Mo o re , 54 7 U . S . 25 0, 25 5 n . 2 (20 06 ) (B i v e ns a c tio n is fe dera l anal og t o ci vi l ri gh t s s ui tagai nstst at e off i ci al s) . T he di stri ctcourtprop er l y di sm i ss ed any c l ai m un der the F eder alT ort C l a i m s A c tbe c aus e J os tf a i l e d t o e xhaus thi s a dm i ni s tr a t i ve r e m e di e s be f or e f i l i ng th is a c tio n . See 28 U . S . C . §§ 2401( b) , 2675( a ) ; 39 C . F . R . § 912. 5.07-16032 3 T he di s tr i c tc ourta c t e d w i thi n i t s di s c r e t i on bydi s m i s s i ng J os t ’ s c om pl a i nt w ith o u t le a v e to a m e n d . See B al se r v . D ep ’ t

of Just i ce, O

f f . of U . S. T rustee , 327 F .3 d9 0 3 , 9 1 1 ( 9 th C ir . 2 0 0 3 ) ( a f f irm in g d e n ia l o f

le a v e to a m e n dc o m p la in t, de s pi t e l i be r a l i tyge ne r a l l ya f f or de d pr o s e l i t i gant s , be c aus e ope ni ng br i e f on appealse tforth n o l egalbasi s f or re vers al ). Jost ’ s r em ai ni ng cont ent i on s are un pers uasi ve. AF F I RME D.