2009 D e c i sion s O p inion s of the U nit e d S t at e s C our t of Appe al s for the Thir d C ir c uit
5-7-2009 

# C edric Lightfo ot v

. U SA
P r e c e de nt i al or N on-P r e c e de nt i al : P r e c e de nt i al D ocke t N o . 08-2602

F o l low thi s a nd a dd it ion al work s at : http://d i git alc ommon s .l a w . vi l l a nova . e du/thir dc ir c uit_2009

Thi s de c i sion i s br ou ght t o you for f r e e a nd ope n a c c e s s b y the O p inion s of the U nit e d S t at e s C our t of Appe al s for the Thir d C ir c uit at V i l l a nova U nive r sity S choo l of L a

w Di git al Reposit ory

. It h as be e n a c c ept e d for inclusion in 2009 D e c i sion s b y a n author i z e d a dmini s tr at or of V i l l a nova U nive r sity S choo l of L a

w Di git al Reposit ory

. F or mor e inform at ion, p le as e c ont a ct Be n j amin . C arl s on@l a

w . vi l l a nova . e du
. Re c omme nde d C it at ion

" C e dr ic L i ghtfoot v

. U SA" (2009). 2009 D e cisio n s . P ape r 1277. http://d i git alc ommon s .l a

w . vi l l a nova . e du/thir dc ir c uit_2009/1277T he Hon o r a b l e Ri c har d G

. St earns , D i s t r i ctJ udge fort he * U ni t ed St at es D i s t r i ct C o ur tforM as s achus et t s , s i t t i ng by P RE CE DE NT I AL

UN I TED STATES CO UR T OF A PP EALS F O R T H E T H IR D C IR C U IT

N o. 08- 2602

C E D R IC L IG H T F O O T , A ppel l ant

v. UNI TE D ST ATE S OF AM ERI CA

O n A p p ea l from the U n it ed S tat es D istri ct C o u rt f o r th e E a ste rn D istric t o f P e n n sy lv a n ia D i s t r i ctC our tN o. 2- 08- cv- 00170 D i stri ctJudg e: T he H on orabl e Jan E
. D ub ois

Subm i t t ed Pur s uantt o T hi r d C i r cui tL
. A

. R
. 34. 1( a)

A pr i l 14, 2009 B e f o re : M c K E E , S M IT H , C i r cui tJudges a n d S T E A R N S , D is tr i ct Judge *des i gnat i on. ( Fi l ed: M ay7, 2009) Fr ank S. Pol l ock B row nst ei n, V i t al e & W ei ss 1500 J ohn Jo h n F
. K en n ed yB o u leva rd Sui t e 1020 Phi l adel phi a, PA 19102 C ouns el f orAppel l ant Paul W
. K aufman O f f i c e o f U n i t e d S t a t e s A t t o r n e y 615 C hes t nutSt r eet Sui t e 1250 Phi l adel phi a, PA 19106- 0000 C ouns el f orAppel l ee

OP I NI ON

S T E A R N S , D is tr i ct

Judge.
T hi s appea l ar i s es outof the D i s t r i ctC our t ’ s di s m i s s al of C e d ric L ig h tf

o o t’s F e d e ra l T o rt C laim s A c t (F T C A ) c laim a g a in st th e U n ited S tate s P o sta l S e rv ice (U S P S ) f o r f a ilu re to fi l e hi s cl ai m w i t hi n t he appl i cabl e s t atut e of l i m i t at i ons . Fort heIn h is i n iti a l c laim L ig h tf o o t d e sc rib e d h im se lf

a s b o th 1 th e passeng er and d ri ver of the car; ho w ever, i n h i s appell ate b ri e f h e c o n s is te n tly d e s c ri b e s h im s e lf a s th e d ri v e r. re a so n s s tate d , w e w ill a f f irm th e ju d g m e n t o f th e D istric t C o u rt. I. L ig h tf o o t w a s d riv in g n o rth b o u n d o n B ro a d S tre e t in Phi l adel phi a on O ct ober6, 2004, w hen he c l ai m s t o have be en s i d e s wi p e d b ya p o s t a l v a n d r i v e n b yUSPS e mpl o y e e Darr e l l E. M oor e. L igh t footal l eges t hatt he ac ci dentw as caus ed by

1 M oor e’ s i nat t ent i venes s as h e at t empt ed a l ane c hange. T he cont actcaus ed Li ght foott o “vi ol ent l y ” col l i de w i t h a parked veh i cl e. L i ght footal l eges t hathe s us t ai ned s er i ous per s onal in ju ri e s a s w e ll a s d a m a g e to h is c a r. O n Sept em ber19, 2006, L i ght foots ubm i t t ed an ad m inistrati v e c lai m to the U S P S

. E d w ard W eiss, L igh tfo o t’ s at t or ney , s ent t he cl ai m bycert i fi ed mai l

. L i ght footdemanded $3, 790. 74 i n compensa t i on forpr oper t ydamage and $75, 0 00 for hi s per s onal i nj ur i es . T he U SPS deni ed Li ght foot ’ s cl ai m on or aboutN ovember8, 2006. T he l et t erof deni al not i fi ed Li ght foot that h e h ad six m o n ths to fil e a civil ac ti o n in the D istri ct C o u rt or , al t ernat i vel y , t h at he coul d r eques tr econs i der at i on byt he U S P S w ith in s ix m o n th s o f th e d a te o f

th e d e n ia l.
L i ght foot all eges thathe s oughtr econs i der at i on t hr ee w eeks pr i ort o t he deadl i ne by m ai l i ng a fi r s tcl as s l et t ert o t heL i ght foot offe r s t he affi davi t of at t or neyFr ank Pol l ock 2 des cr i bi ng t he l aw fi r m ’ s m ai l i ng pr ocedur e and hi s r ecol l ect i on o f si g n ing a fina l co p y o f th e req u est fo r reco n side rati o n b ef o re gi vi ng i tt o hi s s ecr et aryt o be mai l ed. T es zneral s o s ubm i t t ed an af fid av it

. In it, h e states tha t he d id n o t r ec eive L igh tfo o t’ s re q u e s t f o r r e c o n s id e ra tio n . U S P S on A pr i l 16, 2007. L i ght footcl ai m s t hatt he l et t erw as s e n tb yh i s a t t o r n e y s t o R i c h a r d Te s z n e r , t h e To r tCl a i ms C o o rdin ator f

o r th e U S P S

. H o w ev er, th e U S P S h as n o rec o rd of havi ng r ece i ved the l et t er . L i ght footfil ed the i ns t ant 2 c o m p la in t in th e D is tr ic t C o u rt o n J a n u a ry 4 , 2 0 0 8
. T he U SPS m oved t o di s m i s s L i ght foot ’ s compl ai nt pur s uantt o Fed. R
. C iv. P

. 12( b) ( 1) forl ack of s ubj ectm at t er j ur i s di ct i on. T he D i s t r i ctC our tgr ant ed the mot i on, hol di ng t hat t h e FTCA r e q u i r e s p r o o f o f r e c e i p t o f a r e q ues t for r econs i d era t i on. Fort he r eas ons s t at ed, w e w i l l aff i r m t he ju d g m e n t o f

th e D is tr ic t C o u rt
.

II. T h is C o u rth as ju ri sd ict ion to rev iew the D istri ct C o u rt ’s or der pur s uant t o 28 U
. S. C

. § 1291. “The s t andar d of r evi ew for s u b j e c tma t t e rj u r i s d i c t i o n i s p l e n a r y . ” S iki r i ca v. N at i onw i de I ns . C o. , 4 1 6 F .3 d 2 1 4 , 2 1 9 (3 d C ir . 2 0 0 5 ).
III
. T he F T C A precl ud es sui tagainstt he U nit ed S t at es un l ess2 8 U .S .C . § 2 6 7 5 (a ) p ro v id e s th a t: 3 A n a c tio n sh a ll n o t b e in stitu te d u p o n a c laim agai ns tt he U ni t ed St at es form oneydamages for i nj ur yorl os s of pr opertyorper s onal i nj ur yor death ca u sed byt he negl i gentorw r ongful actor om i s s i on of anyempl oy ee of t he G overnm ent w hi l e ac ti ng w i t hi n t he s cope of hi s offi ce or em ploym e nt, un l ess the clai m ant s hall hav e fi rs t pr es ent ed the cl ai m t o t he appr opr i at e Feder al a gen cyand his cl ai m shal l hav e been fin a lly deni ed byt he age ncyi n w r i t i ng and sentby cert i fi ed orr egi ster ed mai l

. T he fa i l ur e of a n a g e n c yto m a k e f

in a l d isp o sitio n o f a c laim w ith in s i x m ont hs aft eri ti s fi l ed sh all , att he opt i on of t he cl ai m antany ti m e ther eaf t er , be dee m ed a f in a l d e n ial o f

th e c laim f

o r p u rp o se s o f

th is s ect i on. 2 8 U .S .C . § 2 4 0 1 (b ) p ro v id e s: 4 [a] t or t claim agai ns tt he U ni t ed St at es s hal l be t he cl ai m anthas fi r s t pr es ent ed t he cl ai m t o t he r el evantFeder al a g e n c ya n d th e c la im h a s b e e n f in a lly d e n ie d

. See 2 8 U .S .C . § 2675( a)

. T he fi nal deni al r equi r ementi s “j ur i s di ct i on al and

3 c a n n o t b e w a iv e d .” B i al ow as v. U ni t ed Stat es , 443 F. 2d 1047, 1 0 4 9 ( 3 d Ci r . 1 9 7 1 )

. Af

t e rt h e d e n i a l o f a n a d mi n i s t r a t i v e c l a i m, t he cl ai m ant has t w o opt i ons : ( 1) he m ay fi l e s ui ti n t he D i s t r i ct C o u rt w ith in si x m o n ths of the de n ial p u rsua n t to 28 U .S .C . § 2 4 0 1 (b ); o r (2 ) h e m a yf ile a re q u e st f

o r re c o n sid e ra tio n d ire c tly 4f o re v e r b a rre d u n les s itis p re se n ted in w riting to the a p p rop ri ate F ed era l age n cyw ith in tw o y ea rs aft ers uch cl ai m acc rues or unl es s act i on i s begun w i t hi n s i x m ont hs af

ter the dat e of mai l i ng, by cert i fi ed or r egi s t er ed mai l , of not i ce of fi nal deni al of t he cl ai m by t he agency t o w hi ch i tw as pr es ent ed. w i t h t he age ncyt o w hi ch the clai m w as or i gi nal l ym ade. R egu la t i on 39 C

. F. R
. § 912. 9( b)

- ( c) s et s outt he fi l i ng r equi r ement s for r econs i der at i on of the deni al of a c l ai m byt he U S P S : (b ) P rio r t o th e c o m m e n c e m e n t o f su it a n d p rio r to th e e x p ira tio n o f

th e 6 m o n th p e r io d p ro v id e d in 2 8 U .S .C . § 2 4 0 1 (b ), a c laim a n t, h is d u ly a u th o riz e d a g e n t, o r l e g a l re p re se n tativ e , m a yf ile a w r i t t en r equestw i t h t he pos t al offi ci al w ho iss u e d th e f

in a l d e n ial o r w ith th e C h ief C o u n se l, Na t i o n a l T o r tCe n t e r , U. S

. P o s t a l S e r v i c e , P
. O. B o x 6 6 6 4 0 , S t. L o u is, M O 6 3 1 4 1 -06 4 0 , f o r a r econs i der at i on of a f

i nal deni al of a c l ai m under p a ra g ra p h ( a ) o f

th is s e c tio n . U p o n th e tim e ly fi l i ng of a r eques tforr econs i der at i on, the Post al Ser vi ce s hal l have 6 mont hs fr om t he dat e of f ili n g in w h ich to m a k e a d isp o sitio n o f th e c laim a n d t he c l a i ma n t ’ s o p t i o n u n d e r2 8 U. S

. C. 2675( a) s hal l notacc rue unt i l 6 m ont hs aft ert he fi l i ng of a r eques tf

o rr econs i der at i on. Fi nal Post al Ser vi ce ac ti on on a r eques tforr econs i der at i onI f the U SPS deni es t he r eques t f orr econs i der at i on ( or 5 a llo w s th e re q u e st b u t d e n ies th e c laim ), th e c laim a n t m a yf ile in D is tr ic t C o u rt s ix m o n th s a f te r th e re q u e s t w a s f

ile d

. See 39 C

. F. R
. § 912. 9. sh a ll b e e f

f e c ted in a c c o rd a n c e w ith th is p a rt. ( c) For pur pos es of t hi s sec ti o n , a re q u est for r econs i der at i on of a f

i nal deni al of a clai m s hal l be deemed t o have been fi l ed w hen r ece i ved i n t he off i ce of t he off i ci al w ho i s s ued the fi nal deni al ori n t he off i ce of t h e Chi e f

Cou n s e l , Nat i o n a l To r tCe n t e r , U. S. Po s t al S e rv ic e . . . . 5 L i ght footbear s t he bur den of de m on str at i ng s ubj ect m a tte r j u r i s d ic tio n . See Carpet G r oup I

nt ’ lv. O r i entalR ug Im p o rters A ss’n , 227 F. 3d 62, 69 ( 3d C i r . 2000)

. L i ght foot al l eges t hat he fi l ed hi s r eques tforr econs i der at i on on A pr i l 16, 200 7 , a n d t h a tt h e Di s t r i c tCou r te r r e d i n r e f u s i n g t o a p p l yt he
“ m a ilb o x ru le ” to h is c la im f o r r e c o n s id e ra tio n . W e d is a g re e . T h e p la in lan g u a g e o f

3 9 C .F .R . § 9 1 2 .9 (c ) is f a tal to L i ght fo ot ’ s c on t e nt i on . The r e gu l a t i on pr ov i de s t ha ta r e quest for r econs i der at i on i s “dee m ed t o have be en fi l ed w hen r ece i ved in th e o ff

ice of the of

ficial w h o issue d the fina l d en ial

. . . .” ( emphasi s added)

. “I t i s el ement ary t hat ‘ [t ] he U ni t ed S t at es , as so v ere ign , is im m u n e fro m su it sav e as i t co n sen ts to be s u ed

. ’” U n itedS ta tes v . Mitch e ll , 445 U
. S. 535, 538 (19 80) ( quot i ng U nit ed S tat es v. Sher w ood , 3 1 2 U
. S

. 5 8 4 , 5 8 6 (19 4 1 )). In e n a c t i n g t h e F TCA, Co n g r e s s wa i v e d i mmu n i t yf o rt o r tc l a i ms a ga i ns t t he U ni t e d St a t e s a nd i t s a ge nc i e s , i nc l ud i ng t he U SPS. See D ol an v. U

n it edSt at es P os t alSer v. , 546 U
. S. 481, 484 (20 0 6 ). H o w ev er, th e w aive r i s li m it e d , s ee Mi l l erv. P hi l a. G eri atr i c C tr. , 4 6 3 F .3 d 2 6 6 , 2 7 0

- 2 7 1 ( 3 d C ir. 2 0 0 6 ), an d is s tr ic tly c o n s tru e d in f

a v o r o f th e s o v e re ig n . See O r f f v. U ni t ed St at es , 5 4 5 U .S . 5 9 6 , 6 0 1 -6 0 2 (2 0 0 5 ).L i ght footr el i es heavi l yon G l ov e rv . U ni t e d St ates for 6 t he pr opos i t i on t hatcour t s s houl d di s t i n g u is h betw een the r equi r ement s fo r in i t i al pr es ent at i on and a r eques tfor re c o n s id e ra t i o n o f a d e n ia l o f a p ro p e rl yp re s e n te d c la im

. See 1 1 1 F . S u p p . 2 d 1 9 0 , 1 9 4 -1 9 5 (E .D .N .Y . 2 0 0 0 ). G l over is not p ersu asiv e. A s the T en th C ir cu ith as n o ted “ [n ]ow h ere is th ere anyi ndi cat i on t hat w hat cons t i tut es pr es entm ent of a r eques tfor reco nsi derat i on i s di fferentfrom present m ent of t he cla im i t s el f. ” A nder ber

g v. U ni t ed Stat es , 7 1 8 F .2 d 9 7 6 , 9 7 7 (1 0 th C ir. 1 9 8 3 ); s ee al

s o Moya , 3 5 F .3 d a t 5 0 4
. C o u rt s in o th e r ju risd ictio n s h a v e a lm o st u n if o rm ly co n c l u d e d t h a t t h e t e r m “ p r e s e n t e d ” i n t h e f i l i ng of an a d mi n i s t r a t i v e c l a i m me a n s mo r e t h a n me r e l yma i l i n g t h e c l a i m. See Moya v. U

n it edS tate s , 35 F. 3d 501, 504 ( 10t h C i r . 1994) ( r ej ect i ng anypr es um pt i on t hata cl ai m w as r ece i ved w her e an at t or neyby af

fi davi ts w or e thats he had s enta r eques tfor re c o n sid e ra tio n b y c e rtifie d m a il); D r az an v. U ni t ed Stat es , 762 F
. 2 d 5 6 , 5 8 (7th C ir

. 1 9 8 5 ) (“[ M ]ail ing is n o t p rese n ti n g ; th ere m u st b e re c e ip t.”); B ai ley v. U ni t ed Stat es , 642 F. 2d 344, 347 (9 th C ir. 1 9 8 1 ) (re f

u sin g to “ a c c e p t ap p e llan ts’ in v itatio n to r ew r i t e the [FTC A ] and i n eff ectr epea l t he r egul at i on by hol di ng t hat m ai l i ng al one i s s uffi ci entt o m eett he r equi r ement t hata cl ai m be ‘ pr es ent ed. ’ ”)

. T he N i nt h C i r cui t r ece nt l ynot ed that sinc e B ai l ey , “ v i r tu a l l ye v e r yc i r c u i tt o h a v e ru l e d o n t he i s s u e h a s h e l d t h a tt h e ma i l b o x ru l e d o e s n o t a p p l yt o [ F T CA ] cl ai m s , r egar dl es s of w hetheri tm i ghtappl yt o ot herfede r al comm on l aw cl ai m s . ” V acek v. U ni t ed St at es P os t alSer v. , 447 F. 3d 1248, 1252 ( 9t h C ir

. 2006)

. W e now j oi n t hes e s i s t er C our t s i n r ej ect i ng t he mai l box rul e and hol di ng t hata pl ai nt i ff m us t demonst r at e t hat t he Feder al agenc yw as i n actual r ece i pt of the cl ai m , w hetheron i ni t i al pr es entm ent or on a r eques tfor r econs i der at i on. 6 Fort he for egoi ng r eas ons , w e w i l l af fi r m t he j udgm ent o f th e D is tr ic t C o u rt
.