Opinion
Civil Action No. 01-0069-BH-S
May 10, 2001
ORDER
This action is before the Court on defendant's motion to dismiss (Doc. 10) and plaintiff's motion for leave to amend her complaint (Doc. 14). Upon consideration of these motions, the parties' arguments in support of and opposition thereto (Docs. 11, 12, 15 and 22), the Court concludes that plaintiff has failed, either in the initial and first amended complaints or in the pending proposed amended complaint, to assert a claim over which this Court has jurisdiction. The Court therefore concludes and it is accordingly ORDERED that defendant's motion to dismiss is due to be granted while plaintiff's motion for leave to amend is due to be denied.
The Court specifically concludes, for the reasons stated by the defendant in his Reply Brief (Doc. 22), that the plaintiff seeks funds which would be expended from the public treasury of the United States and has failed to establish subject matter jurisdiction law tort claims she claims to have asserted against this defendant. 28 U.S.C. § 1346(b) and 2671-2680. Although the FTCA waives the Federal government's sovereign immunity under limited circumstances, none of those applicable circumstances are indicated from the facts asserted by the plaintiff and the plaintiff has failed to assert facts establishing that she has exhausted the administrative remedies which are a prerequisite to bringing any action in this Court.
Plaintiff has also failed to establish jurisdiction under the Social Security Act and disavows any attempt to assert a claim under that act.
For the reasons stated above, it is ORDERED that defendant's motion to dismiss be and is hereby GRANTED while plaintiff's motion for leave to amend be and is hereby DENIED. In view of plaintiff's failure to allege exhaustion of the required administrative remedies and the government's evidence supporting such failure, the Court finds it unnecessary to provide the plaintiff with another opportunity to amend her complaint.