Home

Back to the Indian Law Bulletins

(Cite as: Not Reported in F.3d, 2005 WL 426703 (C.A.D.C.))

VanGuilder v. U.S.
C.A.D.C.,2005.
Only the Westlaw citation is currently available.
United States Court of Appeals, District of Columbia Circuit.
Edward VANGUILDER, Appellant
v.
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Appellee
No. 04-5220.

Feb. 23, 2005.
Rehearing denied March 29, 2005.

Edward Vanguilder, North Granville, NY, pro se.
Mark R. Haag, U.S. Department of Justice, Washington, DC, for Defendant-Appellee.

BEFORE: EDWARDS, HENDERSON, and GARLAND, Circuit Judges.

ORDER

PER CURIAM.
*1 Upon consideration of the motion for summary affirmance, the oppositions thereto, and appellant's brief, it is

ORDERED that the motion for summary affirmance be granted. Appellant has not identified any waiver of sovereign immunity other than perhaps the Quiet Title Act that is relevant to his claims, he makes no attempt to demonstrate that the district court erred in holding that he had failed to state a claim under the Act, and he has not established that he is exempt from the requirements of the Act or from the more general requirement that the plaintiff show a waiver of sovereign immunity authorizing his claims against the United States. See, e.g., Chayoon v. Chao, 355 F.3d 141, 143 (2d Cir.2004). The merits of the parties' positions are so clear as to warrant summary action. See Taxpayers Watchdog, Inc. v. Stanley, 819 F.2d 294, 297 (D.C.Cir.1987) (per curiam).

Pursuant to D.C. Circuit Rule 36, this disposition will not be published. The Clerk is directed to withhold issuance of the mandate herein until seven days after resolution of any timely petition for rehearing or petition for rehearing en banc. See Fed. R.App. P. 41(b); D.C.Cir. Rule 41.

Home  |   Search  |   Disclaimer  |   Privacy Statement  |   Site Map