Plunkett v. San Diego Post Office
- Proceeding
- district
- Area
- civil
- Panel
- Andrew G. Schopler (author)
Analysis
The court considered the defendant's unopposed motion to dismiss for lack of subject-matter jurisdiction in a case where the plaintiff alleged the loss of a letter containing money. The court granted the motion, holding that the Federal Tort Claims Act's exception for the loss of postal matter deprives the court of jurisdiction.
| What the court decided | The model |
|---|---|
Motion to dismiss for lack of subject-matter jurisdiction granted“Defendant’s unopposed motion to dismiss is thus GRANTED, and the Clerk is directed to close this case.” | agree with court The court correctly identified that the plaintiff's claim for the loss of a letter falls squarely within the Federal Tort Claims Act's exception for the loss of postal matter, which preserves the USPS's sovereign immunity. Because the exception applies, the court lacks subject-matter jurisdiction and is required to dismiss the action under Rule 12(h)(3). |
The order itself: sound — The order correctly applies the law regarding sovereign immunity and the specific statutory exception for the loss of postal matter. It accurately cites the relevant statutes and binding precedent to support the conclusion that the court lacks jurisdiction.
Opinion
I UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 2 SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 3 || Pablo Boines PLUNKETT, Case No.: 3:24-cv-0696-AGS-AHG 4 Plaintift,| ORDER GRANTING MOTION TO 5 || DISMISS (ECF 5) 6 UNITED STATES POSTAL SERVICE, Defendant. 7 8 Plaintiff Pablo Plunkett claims that his “friend [sent] [him] some money” and the 9 “letter disappear[ed].” (ECF 1-2, at 2.) He seeks damages from the United States Postal 10 || Service for “pain and suffering.” (/d. at 3.) In response, the USPS filed a motion to dismiss 11 || for lack of subject-matter jurisdiction. (ECF 5.) 12 The USPS is “an independent establishment of the executive branch of the 13 ||Government of the United States,” 39 U.S.C. § 201, and therefore “enjoys federal 14 sovereign immunity” that shields it from suit, “absent a waiver,” Dolan v. U.S. Postal Serv., 15 ||546 U.S. 481, 484 (2006). The Federal Tort Claims Act provides one such a waiver for 16 || “tort claims arising out of activities of the Postal Service.” 39 U.S.C. § 409. 17 But here what the FTCA giveth, the FTCA taketh away. The FTCA excepts from its 18 || waiver “[a]ny claim arising out of the loss... letters of postal matter.” 28 U.S.C. 19 § 2860(b). Since Plunkett’s claim “fall[s] within” this exception, “federal courts lack 20 ||subject matter jurisdiction to hear” it. See Nurse v. United States, 226 F.3d 996, 1000 21 ||(9th Cir. 2000). So, this Court “must dismiss the action See Fed. R. Civ. P. 12(h)(3). 22 || Defendant’s unopposed motion to dismiss is thus GRANTED, and the Clerk is directed to 23 || close this case. 24 || Dated: December 9, 2024 25 A %6 Andrew G. Schopler United States District Judge 27 28 ]