Court Opinion

ID: 9408611
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-07-13 15:02:12.151297+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T17:20:45.634604
License: Public Domain

Case: 23-1716     Document: 13     Page: 1    Filed: 07/13/2023

            NOTE: This order is nonprecedential.

   United States Court of Appeals
       for the Federal Circuit
                   ______________________

                   STEVEN JOHNSON,
                    Plaintiff-Appellant

                              v.

                     UNITED STATES,
                     Defendant-Appellee
                   ______________________

                         2023-1716
                   ______________________

    Appeal from the United States Court of Federal Claims
 in No. 1:22-cv-01741-MBH, Senior Judge Marian Blank
 Horn.
                  ______________________

                       ON MOTION
                   ______________________

 PER CURIAM.
                          ORDER
     Steven Johnson appeals from the judgment of the
 United States Court of Federal Claims dismissing his com-
 plaint for lack of jurisdiction and moves for leave to proceed
 in forma pauperis. We summarily affirm.
    Mr. Johnson sued the United States in the Court of
 Federal Claims seeking five million dollars for medical
Case: 23-1716     Document: 13     Page: 2    Filed: 07/13/2023

 2                                              JOHNSON   v. US

 malpractice, cyberbullying, “injustice,” and violations of his
 civil rights, including false imprisonment, and violations of
 the Privacy Act. The United States moved to dismiss for
 lack of subject matter jurisdiction, and the Court of Federal
 Claims granted the motion.
      The Tucker Act, 28 U.S.C. § 1491, limits the jurisdic-
 tion of the Court of Federal Claims to monetary claims not
 sounding in tort against the United States based on a
 source of substantive law that “can fairly be interpreted as
 mandating compensation by the Federal Government.”
 United States v. Navajo Nation, 556 U.S. 287, 290 (2009)
 (citations and internal quotation marks omitted). Here,
 the Court of Federal Claims properly determined that it
 lacked jurisdiction to hear Mr. Johnson’s claims.
     The false imprisonment, malpractice, and cyberbully-
 ing claims, the Court of Federal Claims properly held,
 sound in tort, and are thus outside the Tucker Act grant of
 jurisdiction. The Court of Federal Claims was likewise cor-
 rect that Mr. Johnson cannot sue in that court for viola-
 tions of the civil rights statutes that Mr. Johnson identified
 or the Privacy Act. See Shelden v. United States, 742 F.
 App’x 496, 501–02 (Fed. Cir. 2018) (noting claims for viola-
 tions of the Civil Rights Act vest exclusively in the federal
 district courts under 28 U.S.C. § 1343(a)(4)); see also 5
 U.S.C. § 552a(g)(1) (granting federal district courts juris-
 diction in matters under the Privacy Act); Conner v. United
 States, 641 F. App’x 972, 975 (Fed. Cir. 2016) (concluding
 that there is no Tucker Act jurisdiction over Privacy Act
 claims). Finally, Mr. Johnson’s vague claim of “injustice”
 was not premised on any specific source of substantive law
 that imposed a money-mandating obligation on the United
 States.
     Because Mr. Johnson’s brief does not identify any legal
 error in the dismissal order and because the merits of the
 parties’ positions are so clear “that no substantial question
 regarding the outcome of the appeal exists,” we summarily
Case: 23-1716      Document: 13   Page: 3     Filed: 07/13/2023

 JOHNSON   v. US                                             3

 affirm the trial court’s judgment on appeal. Joshua v.
 United States, 17 F.3d 378, 380 (Fed. Cir. 1994).
    Accordingly,
    IT IS ORDERED THAT:
     (1) The judgment of the United States Court of Federal
 Claims is summarily affirmed.
     (2) The motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis
 is denied as moot.
    (3) Each side shall bear its own costs.
                                     FOR THE COURT

 July 13, 2023                       /s/ Jarrett B. Perlow
     Date                            Jarrett B. Perlow
                                     Clerk of Court