D.'Uryyah Ajamu v. United States Postal Service

Case: 14-10258 Date Filed: 07/28/2014 Page: 1 of 2
[DO NOT PUBLISH]
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE ELEVENTH CIRCUIT
________________________
No. 14-10258
Non-Argument Calendar
________________________
D.C. Docket No. 6:13-cv-00450-JA-KRS
D.’URYYAH AJAMU,
Plaintiff-Appellant,
versus
DENISE Y. WILLIS, et al.,
Defendants,
UNITED STATES POSTAL SERVICE,
Defendant-Appellee.
________________________
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Middle District of Florida
________________________
(July 28, 2014)
Case: 14-10258 Date Filed: 07/28/2014 Page: 2 of 2
Before PRYOR, JORDAN and ANDERSON, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM:
D.’Uryyah Ajamu appeals pro se the dismissal of his amended complaint
against the United States Postal Service for violating the Freedom of Information
Act, 5 U.S.C. § 552, and for withholding information because of discriminatory
animus. The district court dismissed Ajamu’s amended complaint for lack of
subject matter jurisdiction. We affirm.
The district court correctly dismissed Ajamu’s amended complaint. Ajamu
alleged that the Service violated the Act by withholding an individual’s address,
but Ajamu attached to his original complaint a response in which the Service
provided the individual’s last known address. Ajamu’s claim about a violation of
the Act became moot when the Service produced the address. See Lovell v.
Alderete, 630 F.2d 428, 430–31 (5th Cir. 1980). And the Service was not liable for
the individual’s supposed refusal to update her address. See NLRB v. Sears,
Roebuck & Co., 421 U.S. 132, 162, 95 S. Ct. 1504, 1522 (1975). Ajamu also
alleged that the Service withheld the mailing address because of his “race, color,
nationality, and faith,” but the district court correctly ruled that claim was barred
by sovereign immunity, see Dolan v. U.S. Postal Serv., 546 U.S. 481, 484, 126 S.
Ct. 1252, 1256 (2006).
We AFFIRM the dismissal of Ajamu’s amended complaint.
2