Judy Shepard v. Pete Geren

United States Court of Appeals
FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT
___________
No. 11-1082
___________
Leonard Bright, *
*
Appellant, *
* Appeal from the United States
v. * District Court for the
* Western District of Missouri.
United States of America, *
* [UNPUBLISHED]
Appellee. *
___________
Submitted: May 5, 2011
Filed: June 13, 2011
___________
Before LOKEN, MURPHY, and COLLOTON, Circuit Judges.
___________
PER CURIAM.
Leonard Bright appeals the district court’s dismissal of his civil action1
claiming that the IRS’s seizure of his wages was unconstitutional. Reviewing de
novo, see Hastings v. Wilson, 516 F.3d 1055, 1058 (8th Cir. 2008), we conclude that
to the extent Bright attempted to proceed under 42 U.S.C. §§ 1983, 1985 or Bivens
v. Six Unknown Named Agents of Fed. Bureau of Narcotics, 403 U.S. 388 (1971),
he failed to state a claim. He alleged no facts showing state action or a conspiracy,
see Zutz v. Nelson, 601 F.3d 842, 848 (8th Cir. 2010); Kurtz v. City of Shrewsbury,
The Honorable Gary A. Fenner, United States District Judge for the Western1
District of Missouri.

-- 1 of 2 --

245 F.3d 753, 758 (8th Cir. 2001), he gave no indication as to the involvement or
identity of any individuals who allegedly committed constitutional violations, see
Ellis v. Norris, 179 F.3d 1078, 1079 (8th Cir. 1999), and a Bivens action cannot be
prosecuted against the United States, see Buford v. Runyon, 160 F.3d 1199, 1203 (8th
Cir. 1998).
Further, we agree with the district court that 28 U.S.C. § 1346(a)(1) did not
confer subject matter jurisdiction over this action, because Bright did not allege that
he filed a claim for a refund with the IRS or that he paid any assessment in full. See
26 U.S.C. § 7422(a); Flora v. United States, 362 U.S. 145, 177 (1960). Based on the
record below, we also agree that 26 U.S.C. § 7421(a) applied to bar the action insofar
as it sought relief from tax-collection activities. See Pagonis v. United States, 575
F.3d 809, 813, 815 (8th Cir. 2009); Stone v. Harry, 364 F.3d 912, 914-15 (8th Cir.
2004).
Accordingly, we affirm. See 8th Cir. R. 47B.
______________________________
-2-

-- 2 of 2 --