FILED UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA AUG 10 2021 SHAUN RUSHING, ) Clerk, U.S. District & Bankruptcy Court for the District of Columbia ) Plaintiff, ) ) v. ) Civil Action No. 21-2098 (UNA) ) FEDERAL BUREAU ) OF INVESTIGATION, ) ) Defendant. )

MEMORANDUM OPINION

This matter, brought pro se, is before the Court on review of plaintiff’s application to

proceed in forma pauperis (“IFP”) and his Complaint against the Federal Bureau of

Investigation. The application will be granted, and this case will be dismissed for want of

jurisdiction. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 12(h)(3) (requiring the court to dismiss an action “at any time”

it determines that subject matter jurisdiction is wanting).

Plaintiff sues the FBI based on his alleged services as an informant. He seeks “$110

Trillon dollars.” Compl. at 1. Sovereign immunity bars a suit against the United States and its

agencies except upon consent, which must be clear and unequivocal. United States v. Mitchell,

(1980) (citation omitted). A waiver of sovereign immunity “must be

unequivocally expressed in statutory text, and [it cannot] be implied.” Lane v. Pena,

(1996) (citations omitted). The Tucker Act gives the United States Court of

Federal Claims exclusive jurisdiction

to render judgment upon any claim [exceeding $10,000] 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.

1 Kidwell v. Dep't of Army, Bd. for Correction of Mil. Recs.,

(D.C. Cir. 1995)

(quoting

). Plaintiff’s terse complaint is grounded upon an alleged contractual

relationship. This and the amount sought deprive this Court of jurisdiction. A separate order of

dismissal accompanies this Memorandum Opinion.

_________/s/_______________ EMMET G. SULLIVAN United States District Judge Date: August 10, 2021

2