UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FILED FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA JAN 1 9 2010 Clerk, U.S. District and ) Bankruptcy Courts Clyde Lacy Rattler, ) Plaintiff, ) ) v. ) Civil Action No. 10 0087 ) 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 is a District of Columbia resident suing the United States for negligence. He

seeks "an unlimited sum of money." Compl. at 2. A claim for monetary damages against the

United States is cognizable under the Federal Tort Claims Act ("FTCA"),

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 .... "

. This exhaustion requirement is jurisdictional. See OAF Corp. v. United

States,

(D.C. Cir. 1987); Jackson v. United States,

(D.C.

Cir. 1984); Stokes v. Us. Postal Service,

(D.D.C. 1996). Plaintiff has not

indicated that he exhausted his administrative remedies. Therefore, the complaint will be

dismissed. See Abdurrahman v. Engstrom,

(D.C. Cir. 2005) (per

curiam) ("[T]he district court properly dismissed case [based on unexhausted FTCA claim] for

IV 'i lack of subject matter jurisdiction."). A separate Order accompanies this Memorandum

Opinion.

Date: January . -tL. 13 ,2010 United States Dist let Jud;e ~

2