Court Opinion

ID: 9385198
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-04-06 14:00:48.676154+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T17:17:59.776419
License: Public Domain

Case: 23-1388    Document: 4     Page: 1   Filed: 04/06/2023

          NOTE: This order is nonprecedential.

   United States Court of Appeals
       for the Federal Circuit
                 ______________________

              DAVID ROWLAND MANUEL,
                  Petitioner-Appellant

                            v.

                   UNITED STATES,
                  Respondent-Appellee
                 ______________________

                       2023-1388
                 ______________________

    Appeal from the United States District Court for the
District of Columbia in No. 1:22-cv-03619-UNA, Judge
Amy Berman Jackson.
                ______________________

PER CURIAM.
                        ORDER
     Having received no responses to the order to show
cause why this case should not be dismissed or transferred
for lack of jurisdiction, we conclude that transfer under 28
U.S.C. § 1631 is appropriate under the circumstances.
    David Rowland Manuel brought suit against the
United States in the United States District Court for the
District of Columbia seeking $15,000 for alleged criminal
violations of the Privacy Act under 5 U.S.C.
§ 552a(i)(1), (2), (3). The district court dismissed the
Case: 23-1388      Document: 4   Page: 2   Filed: 04/06/2023

2                                             MANUEL   v. US

complaint without prejudice, and Mr. Manuel appeals to
this court.
    Although this court possesses jurisdiction to review
district court decisions involving certain damages claims
against the United States “not exceeding $10,000 in
amount,” 28 U.S.C. § 1346(a)(2), see 28 U.S.C. § 1295(a)(2),
Mr. Manuel’s claim against the United States exceeds
$10,000. Thus, “the district court’s jurisdiction was not
based, ‘in whole or in part, on [28 U.S.C. § 1346].’ That
being the case, this court has no jurisdiction over [Mr. Ma-
nuel’s] appeal from the district court judgment.” Bragg v.
Keohane, 820 F.2d 402, 403–04 (Fed. Cir. 1987) (quoting 28
U.S.C. § 1295(a)(2)). The appropriate regional circuit for
review of Mr. Manuel’s appeal is the United States Court
of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit. 28 U.S.C. §§ 41, 1291.
    Accordingly,
    IT IS ORDERED THAT:
    The appeal and all its filings are transferred to the
United States Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit pursu-
ant to 28 U.S.C. § 1631.
                                   FOR THE COURT

April 6, 2023                      /s/ Peter R. Marksteiner
     Date                          Peter R. Marksteiner
                                   Clerk of Court