United States Court of Appeals FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT ___________ No. 98-3256 ___________ Stacy Abram, Jr., * * Appellant, * * v. * Appeal from the United States * District Court for the Department of Agriculture, (Sued as * Eastern District of Arkansas.

United States of America), * * [UNPUBLISHED] Appellee. * ___________ Submitted: September 6, 1999 Filed: September 27, 1999 ___________ Before BEAM, LOKEN, and MORRIS SHEPPARD ARNOLD, Circuit Judges. ___________ PER CURIAM.

Following entry of judgment in his civil suit against the Department of Agriculture (USDA), Stacy Abram, Jr. appeals the district court’s1 dismissal of his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 damages claim. We affirm the dismissal of this claim because Mr. Abram may not seek such relief against USDA, a federal agency, under section 1983.

See West v. Atkins, 487 U.S. 42, 48 (1988) (§ 1983 plaintiff must show alleged The Honorable Stephen M. Reasoner, United States District Judge for the Eastern District of Arkansas. deprivation of constitutionally protected right was committed by person acting under color of state law); Hindes v. Federal Deposit Ins. Corp., 137 F.3d 148, 158 (3d Cir. 1998) (finding no authority to support conclusion federal agency is “person” subject to § 1983 liability, whether or not in alleged conspiracy with state actors); Davis v. United States, 439 F.2d 1118, 1119 (8th Cir. 1971) (per curiam) (“By its plain language the statute does not authorize redress against the United States.”); cf. Will v. Michigan Dept. of State Police, 491 U.S. 58, 64, 71 (1989) (neither state, nor its officials acting in their official capacities, are “persons” under § 1983). Mr. Abram’s claim, even if construed as one brought under Bivens v. Six Unknown Named Agents of Fed. Bureau of Narcotics, 403 U.S. 388 (1971), still fails because Bivens also is not a basis upon which to sue a federal agency and Mr. Abram did not name any individuals as defendants. See Federal Deposit Ins. Corp. v. Meyer, 510 U.S. 471, 484-86 (1994) (refusing to extend Bivens to federal agencies and noting individual must be named as defendant under Bivens). Accordingly, the judgment is affirmed.

A true copy.

Attest: CLERK, U.S. COURT OF APPEALS, EIGHTH CIRCUIT.

-2-