Opinion
Civil Action 1:23-cv-03328 (UNA)
11-22-2023
LEWIS ROSS BROWN, Plaintiff, v. MICHAEL REGAN, Defendant.
MEMORANDUM OPINION
Ana C. Reyes, United States District Judge
This matter is before the Court on its initial review of Plaintiff's pro se complaint, ECF No. 1, and application for leave to proceed in forma pauperis, ECF No. 2. The Court will grant the in forma pauperis application and, for the reasons explained below, it will dismiss the case without prejudice.
Plaintiff attempts to sue, pursuant to the Freedom of Information Act (“FOIA”), 5 U.S.C. § 552, the Administrator of the United States Environmental Protection Agency (“EPA”). See Compl. at 1-2, 4. However, Plaintiff cannot sue the EPA's Administrator, because the FOIA authorizes suit only against federal agencies; it does not create a cause of action against individual officials or employees of an agency. Sherwood Van Lines, Inc. v. U.S. Dep't of the Navy, 732 F.Supp. 240, 241 (D.D.C. 1990).
Even if Plaintiff had named a different defendant, his claim would still fail because the only form of relief he seeks-monetary damages, see Compl. at 4-is not available. The United States, its agencies, and its officials are immune from damages suits unless that immunity is waived expressly. United States v. Mitchell, 445 U.S. 535, 538 (1980). It is Plaintiff's burden to establish the existence of a waiver, see, e.g., Hafen v. Pendry, 646 F.Supp.2d 159, 160 (D.D.C. 2009), and the absence of a waiver of sovereign immunity deprives the Court of subject matter jurisdiction, see FDIC v. Meyer, 510 U.S. 471, 475 (1994). Here, there is no indication that the government has waived sovereign immunity. In particular, Plaintiff cannot recover damages under the FOIA because “the sole remedy available to a requester [under the FOIA] is injunctive relief.” Roman v. Nat'l Reconnaissance Off., 952 F.Supp.2d 159, 163-64 (D.D.C. 2013); accord Pickering-George v. Registration Unit, DEA/DOJ, 553 F.Supp.2d 3, 4 (D.D.C. 2008).
Plaintiff thus seeks to sue only defendants that are immune from damages claims and cannot state a claim under the FOIA. The Court will therefore dismiss his complaint and this action without prejudice. See 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B)(ii)-(iii). A separate order accompanies this memorandum opinion.