Case Name: Steven IVEY, Appellant v. DEPARTMENT OF TREASURY, Appellee
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2008-08-08
Citations: 285 F. App'x 763
Docket Number: No. 07-5378
Parties: Steven IVEY, Appellant v. DEPARTMENT OF TREASURY, Appellee.
Judges: BEFORE: GINSBURG, GARLAND, and KAVANAUGH, Circuit Judges.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 285
Pages: 763–764

Head Matter:
Steven IVEY, Appellant v. DEPARTMENT OF TREASURY, Appellee.
No. 07-5378.
United States Court of Appeals, District of Columbia Circuit.
Aug. 8, 2008.
Rehearing Denied Oct. 8, 2008.
Steven Ivey, Orlando, FL, pro se.
Jonathan S. Cohen, Attorney, John A. Nolet, John Arthur Schumann, U.S. Department of Justice, Tax Division, R. Craig Lawrence, Assistant U.S. Attorney, U.S. Attorney’s Office, Civil Appellate, Washington, DC, for Appellee.
BEFORE: GINSBURG, GARLAND, and KAVANAUGH, Circuit Judges.

Opinion:
JUDGMENT
PER CURIAM.
This appeal was considered on the record from the United States District Court for the District of Columbia and on the briefs filed by the parties. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2); D.C.Cir. Rule 34(j). It is
ORDERED AND ADJUDGED that the district court's order filed October 22, 2007, be affirmed. The district court properly concluded that appellant's Privacy Act claims are barred by res judicata. See Allen v. McCurry, 449 U.S. 90, 94, 101 S. Ct. 411, 66 L.Ed.2d 308 (1980). To the extent appellant attempted to raise additional causes of action, there is no private cause of action for perjury and subornation of perjury, see 18 U.S.C. § 1621; Central Bank of Denver v. First Interstate Bank of Denver, 511 U.S. 164, 190, 114 S.Ct. 1439, 128 L.Ed.2d 119 (1994); McDonnell Douglas Corp. v. Widnall, 57 F.3d 1162, 1164 (D.C.Cir.1995), and the forging of evidence claim does not comply with the notice pleading requirements of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, see Fed.R.Civ.P. 8; see also Ciralsky v. C.I.A., 355 F.3d 661, 670 n. 9 (D.C.Cir.2004). The forging of evidence claim is dismissed without prejudice. See id. at 670. It is FURTHER ORDERED that appellant's final brief be struck. Except for the addition of citations to the deferred appendix and correction of typographical errors, no other changes may be made to the final brief. See Fed. R.App. P. 30(c)(2)(B).
The Clerk is directed to withhold issuance of the mandate herein until seven days after resolution of any timely petition for rehearing or petition for rehearing en banc. See Fed. R.App. P. 41(b); D.C.Cir. Rule 41.