Partovi v. United States ( 2010 )

FILED
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT AUG 2 0 2010
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA Clerk, U.S. District & Bankruptcy
Courts for the District of Columbia
Ali Partovi, )
)
Plaintiff, )
)
v. ) Civil Action No.
) 10 1408
United States of America, )
)
Defendant. )
MEMORANDUM OPINION
This matter is before the Court on its initial review of plaintiff s pro se complaint and
application to proceed in forma pauperis. The application will be granted and the complaint
dismissed for lack of subject matter jurisdiction. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 12(h)(3) (requiring
dismissal of an action "at any time" the Court determines that it lacks subject matter jurisdiction).
Plaintiff, an immigration detainee at the Federal Correctional Center in Florence,
Arizona, sues the United States for alleged injuries suffered while confined at facilities in Guam.
He seeks $2 million in damages. A claim for monetary damages against the United States is
cognizable under the Federal Tort Claims Act ("FTCA"), 28 U.S.C. §§ 2671 et seq. Such a
claim is maintainable, however, only after the plaintiff has exhausted his administrative remedies
by "first present[ing] the claim to the appropriate Federal agency .... " 28 U.S.c. § 2675. This
exhaustion requirement is jurisdictional. See GAF Corp. v. United States, 818 F.2d 901, 917-20
(D.C. Cir. 1987); Jackson v. United States, 730 F.2d 808, 809 (D.C. Cir. 1984); Stokes v. us.
Postal Service, 937 F. Supp. 11,14 (D.D.C. 1996). Plaintiff has not indicated that he exhausted
----,--.--,-------~<
his administrative remedies. I The complaint therefore will be dismissed. See Abdurrahman v.
Engstrom, 168 Fed.Appx. 445, 445 (D.C. Cir. 2005) (per curiam) ("[T]he district court properly
dismissed case [based on unexhausted FTC A claim] for lack of subject matter jurisdiction."). A
separate Order accompanies this Memorandum Opinion.
Date: August .il: ,2010
I Even if plaintiff has exhausted his administrative remedies, this judicial district is not
the proper venue for litigating plaintiffs FTCA claim. See 28 U.S.C. § 1402(b) (requiring such
claims to be prosecuted "only in the judicial district where the plaintiff resides or wherein the act
or omission complained of occurred").
2