Case: 24-2356 Document: 20 Page: 1 Filed: 03/20/2025

NOTE: This order is nonprecedential.

United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit ______________________

GARLAND E. WILLIAMS, Plaintiff-Appellant

v.

UNITED STATES, Defendant-Appellee ______________________

2024-2356 ______________________

Appeal from the United States Court of Federal Claims in No. 1:24-cv-00511-PSH, Judge Philip S. Hadji. ______________________

ON MOTION ______________________

Before DYK, PROST, and CHEN, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM. ORDER Garland E. Williams moves for leave to proceed in forma pauperis on appeal from the judgment of the United States Court of Federal Claims dismissing his complaint for lack of jurisdiction. ECF No. 6. We construe his motion and his opening brief as a challenge to the Court of Federal Claims’s certification under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(3) that any Case: 24-2356 Document: 20 Page: 2 Filed: 03/20/2025

2 WILLIAMS v. US

such appeal would not be taken in good faith. We conclude that the appeal is frivolous and therefore dismiss. See 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B) (providing for dismissal at any time upon determination that an appeal is frivolous). After several unsuccessful attempts to challenge state child support orders in federal district court, Mr. Williams filed suit in the Court of Federal Claims in 2021 challeng- ing the garnishment of his federal tax refunds to pay those orders. In January 2023, this court affirmed the dismissal of that complaint for lack of jurisdiction. See Williams v. United States, No. 2022-1712, 2023 WL 193163 (Fed. Cir. Jan. 17, 2023). Undaunted, Mr. Williams filed this com- plaint in April 2024, again challenging the garnishment of years of his tax refunds and arguing that his taxpayer’s re- turn information had been improperly disclosed. The Court of Federal Claims dismissed the complaint for want of jurisdiction on July 26, 2024, and certified that an appeal by Mr. Williams would not be brought in good faith. We dismiss the appeal as frivolous. This court previ- ously made clear to Mr. Williams that 26 U.S.C. § 6402(g) barred the Court of Federal Claims from hearing any ac- tion to restrain or review the Department of the Treasury’s offset of his tax refunds to enforce a state child support or- der or bring an action in that court against the state. None- theless, Mr. Williams again raises the issue before us, without making any cogent argument why a different out- come is warranted here. The Court of Federal Claims was also clearly correct that it lacked jurisdiction over any claim of unauthorized disclosure of taxpayer information because jurisdiction over such claims lies exclusively in fed- eral district court under 26 U.S.C. § 7431(a). See Taylor v. United States, 616 F. App’x 423, 425 (Fed. Cir. 2015). Be- cause Mr. Williams’s arguments do not present a nonfrivo- lous issue for appeal, we deny his motion to proceed in forma pauperis and dismiss under § 1915(e)(2)(B). Accordingly, Case: 24-2356 Document: 20 Page: 3 Filed: 03/20/2025

WILLIAMS v. US 3

IT IS ORDERED THAT: (1) ECF No. 6 is denied, and the appeal is dismissed pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B). (2) Each side shall bear its own costs. FOR THE COURT

March 20, 2025 Date