MEMORANDUM ***

Tara Chand Singhal appeals pro se from the district court’s judgment dismissing Singhal’s action against the Secretary of the Treasury alleging that a Tax Court judge violated Singhal’s due process rights. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291. We review de novo a dismissal on the basis of sovereign immunity. Jachetta v. United States, 653 F.3d 898, 903 (9th Cir. 2011). We affirm.

The district court properly dismissed Singhal’s claim for monetary damages for lack of subject matter jurisdiction because the United States has not waived its sovereign immunity. See FDIC v. Meyer, 510 U.S. 471, 476-78, 114 S.Ct. 996, 127 L.Ed.2d 308 (1994) (the United States has not waived its sovereign immunity for constitutional torts); Gilbert v. DaGrossa, 756 F.2d 1455, 1458 (9th Cir. 1985) (United States is immune from suit unless it has expressly waived its sovereign immunity, and sovereign immunity cannot be circum *472 vented by naming officers and employees of the United States as defendants).

We reject as without merit Singhal’s contentions that the district court judge was biased and the dismissal of his action was a violation of the First Amendment.

Defendant's request for judicial notice (Docket Entry No. 14) is denied.

AFFIRMED.