From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Ford v. Shinseki

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
Aug 19, 2013
538 F. App'x 803 (9th Cir. 2013)

Summary

affirming "judgment of dismissal without prejudice" because veterans claims could only be heard by Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims

Summary of this case from De La Osa v. Wells Fargo Bank, N.A.

Opinion

No. 12-16359 D.C. No. 1:10-cv-01384-AWI-JLT

08-19-2013

WAYNE H. FORD, Plaintiff - Appellant, v. ERIC K. SHINSEKI, Secretary of Veterans Affairs, Defendant - Appellee.


NOT FOR PUBLICATION


MEMORANDUM

This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.


Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Eastern District of California

Anthony W. Ishii, District Judge, Presiding

Before: SCHROEDER, GRABER, and PAEZ, Circuit Judges.

Wayne H. Ford appeals pro se from the district court's entry of judgment dismissing without prejudice of his action alleging constitutional claims arising from the denial of interest on a retroactive veterans' disability benefits award. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291. We review de novo the district court's compliance with our mandate, United States v. Kellington, 217 F.3d 1084, 1092 (9th Cir. 2000), and we affirm.

In Ford's prior appeal, we remanded so that the district court could enter judgment of dismissal without prejudice because the district court lacked subject matter jurisdiction over Ford's action, which requires dismissal without prejudice. See Veterans for Common Sense v. Shinseki, 678 F.3d 1013, 1022, 1026-32 (9th Cir. 2012) (en banc) (Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims has exclusive jurisdiction to review administrative decisions regarding veterans' disability benefits, including all factual, legal, and constitutional questions involving benefits laws); Kelly v. Fleetwood Enters., Inc., 377 F.3d 1034, 1036 (9th Cir. 2004) (dismissals for lack of subject matter jurisdiction should be without prejudice). Accordingly, the district court properly followed our mandate by entering judgment of dismissal without prejudice. See United States v. Cote, 51 F.3d 178, 181 (9th Cir. 1995) (a district court that has received the mandate of an appellate court cannot vary or examine that mandate for any purpose other than executing it).

AFFIRMED.


Summaries of

Ford v. Shinseki

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
Aug 19, 2013
538 F. App'x 803 (9th Cir. 2013)

affirming "judgment of dismissal without prejudice" because veterans claims could only be heard by Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims

Summary of this case from De La Osa v. Wells Fargo Bank, N.A.
Case details for

Ford v. Shinseki

Case Details

Full title:WAYNE H. FORD, Plaintiff - Appellant, v. ERIC K. SHINSEKI, Secretary of…

Court:UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

Date published: Aug 19, 2013

Citations

538 F. App'x 803 (9th Cir. 2013)

Citing Cases

De La Osa v. Wells Fargo Bank, N.A.

With this in mind, federal courts often enter "judgments of dismissal [of the case] without prejudice." Ford…

Gholar v. Dep't of Veteran Admin. Affair

Accordingly, IT IS RECOMMENDED that this action be dismissed without prejudice to permit Plaintiff to pursue…