Siler v. United States ( 2010 )

NOTE: This disposition is nonprecedential.
United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit
2009-5130
STANLEY R. SILER,
Plaintiff-Appellant,
v.
UNITED STATES,
Defendant-Appellee.
Stanley R. Siler, of Salem, Oregon, pro se.
Robert G. Hilton, Trial Attorney, Commercial Litigation Branch, Civil Division,
United States Department of Justice, of Washington, DC, for defendant-appellee. With
him on the brief were Tony West, Assistant Attorney General, and John Fargo, Director.
Appealed from: United States Court of Federal Claims
Judge Francis M. Allegra
NOTE: This disposition is nonprecedential.
United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit
2009-5130
STANLEY R. SILER,
Plaintiff-Appellant,
v.
UNITED STATES,
Defendant-Appellee.
Appeal from the United States Court of Federal Claims in 09-CV-167,
Judge Francis M. Allegra.
__________________________
DECIDED: February 2, 2010
__________________________
Before MAYER, GAJARSA, and LINN, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM.
Stanley R. Siler appeals the order of the United States Court of Federal Claims
dismissing his complaint as barred by the doctrine of res judicata. See Siler v. United
States, No. 09-167C (Fed. Cl. July 10, 2009). The trial court also held that, even if res
judicata did not apply, the case would still be dismissed for lack of jurisdiction and
failure to state a claim. We affirm.
Along with numerous actions in other courts, Siler has previously filed four
complaints in the Court of Federal Claims. We affirmed the dismissals of these four
cases, each of which vaguely alleged that the United States had interfered with Siler’s
copyrights. His most recent complaint once again implies that the United States has in
some manner interfered with his copyrights, and argues that the United States courts
have acted unfairly in adjudicating his prior claims. The complaint also makes several
allegations of negligence against private individuals based on personal injuries Siler
allegedly suffered in 1983.
As noted by the trial court, Siler’s allegations of negligence and claims against
private individuals are outside that court’s limited jurisdiction “to render judgment upon
any claim against the United States founded either upon the Constitution, or any Act of
Congress or any regulation of an executive department, or upon any express or implied
contract with the United States, or for liquidated or unliquidated damages in cases not
sounding in tort.” 28 U.S.C. § 1491(a)(1). Nor does the court have jurisdiction to review
decisions of other federal courts. Joshua v. United States, 17 F.3d 378, 380 (Fed. Cir.
1994).
Regarding Siler’s copyright allegations, the Court of Federal Claims correctly
stated that the United States can only be held liable for direct appropriation, not for
inducing or allowing others to infringe a copyright. Boyle v. United States, 200 F.3d
1369, 1373 (Fed. Cir. 2000). Siler’s complaint does not allege any facts that would
show that the government has directly appropriated his copyright and therefore fails to
state a claim upon which relief could be granted. Cary v. United States, 552 F.3d 1373,
1376 (Fed. Cir. 2009) (explaining that a complaint must allege “enough facts to state a
claim to relief that is plausible on its face” to avoid dismissal).
2009-5130 2
Because Siler failed to raise any valid claim over which the Court of Federal
Claims has jurisdiction, his complaint was appropriately dismissed. We need not reach
the dismissal based on res judicata.
2009-5130 3