['Turner v. United States Parole Commission']

FILED UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT MAR 23 2314 F@R THE DISTRICT OF C()LUMBIA clerk u.s. nismcr s. Bankruprcy Courts for the District of Columbia David Lewis Turner, Jr., Plaintiff, v. civil A¢mm N@. / §¢- §¢ U.S. Parole Commission, Defendant. \J\/\}§/\./§/\./\/\/\./ MEl\/IORANDUM OPINION This matter is before the Court on review ofplaintifi` s pro se complaint and application to proceed informal pauperis. The Court will grant plaintiff s application to proceed in forma pauperis and will dismiss this action for lack of subject matter jurisdiction See Fed. R. Civ. P. l2(h)(3) (requiring the court to dismiss an action "at any time" it determines that subject matter jurisdiction is wanting). Plaintiff, a District of Columbia resident, sues the United States Parole Commission for false arrest, wrongful imprisonment, and negligence. He seeks $80,000 in monetary damages. A claim for monetary damages against the United States (or a U.S. agency or agency component) is cognizable for certain misconduct under the Federal Tort Claims Act ("FTCA"), 28 U.S.C. §§ 2671 et seq. Such a claim is maintainable, however, only after the plaintiff has exhausted administrative remedies by "first present[ing] the claim to the appropriate Federal agency. . . ." 28 U.S.C. § 2675 . This exhaustion requirement is jurisdictional. See GAF Corp. v. United States. 818 F.2d 90l, 917-20 (D.C. Cir. 1987); jackson v. United States, 730 F.2d 808, 809 (D.C. Cir. 1984); Stokes v. U.S. Postal Service, 937 F. Supp. ll, 14 (D.D.C. 1996). Since plaintiffhas l not indicated that he exhausted her administrative remedies under the FTCA, this case will be dismissed. See Abdurrahman v. Engslrom, 168 Fed.Appx. 445, 445 (D.C. Cir. 2005) (per curiam) ("[T]he district court properly dismissed case [based on unexhausted FTCA claim] for lack of subject matter jurisdiction,"). A separate Order accompanies this Mem0randum Opinion. United States District Judge Date: February 2 ,2014