Case Name: Frederic Paul SMITH, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. UNITED STATES POSTAL SERVICE, Defendant-Appellee
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2017-12-28
Citations: 708 F. App'x 419
Docket Number: No. 17-35004
Parties: Frederic Paul SMITH, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. UNITED STATES POSTAL SERVICE, Defendant-Appellee.
Judges: Before: WALLACE, SILVERMAN, and BYBEE, Circuit Judges.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 708
Pages: 419–420

Head Matter:
Frederic Paul SMITH, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. UNITED STATES POSTAL SERVICE, Defendant-Appellee.
No. 17-35004
United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.
Submitted December 18, 2017
Filed December 28, 2017
Frederic Paul Smith, Pro Se
Before: WALLACE, SILVERMAN, and BYBEE, Circuit Judges.
The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2).

Opinion:
MEMORANDUM
Frederic Paul Smith appeals pro se from the district court's judgment dismissing on the basis of sovereign immunity his action against the United States Postal Service ("USPS") alleging that a USPS employee stole a sapphire he sent through |;he U.S. mail. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291. We review de novo. Harger v. Dep't of Labor, 569 F.3d 898, 903 (9th Cir. 2009). We affirm.
The district court properly dismissed Smith's action on the basis of sovereign immunity because the waiver of sovereign immunity under 28 U.S.C. § 1346(b) does not apply to "[a]ny claim arising out of the loss, miscarriage, or negligent transmission of letters or postal matter." 28 U.S.C. § 2680(b); see also 28 U.S.C. § 1346(b) (waiving United States sovereign immunity for certain tort actions); Dolan v. U.S. Postal Serv., et al., 546 U.S. 481, 487, 126 S.Ct. 1252, 163 L.Ed.2d 1079 (2006) (discussing meaning of "loss" under § 2680(b)).
Contrary to Smith's contention, the USPS did not waive its sovereign immunity in its letter denying Smith's administrative claim. See Gilbert v. DaGrossa, 756 F.2d 1455, 1460 n.6 (9th Cir. 1985) ("A claim for damages against a federal agency is barred by sovereign immunity unless Congress has consented to suit,").
We do not consider documents not presented to the district court. See United States v. Elias, 921 F.2d 870, 874 (9th Cir. 1990) ("Documents or facts not presented to the district court are not part of the record on appeal.").
AFFIRMED.
This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.