Justin Everett v. United States

N OTE: This order is nonprecedential.
United States Court of Appeals
for the Federal Circuit
______________________
JUSTIN EVERETT,
Plaintiff-Appellant
v.
UNITED STATES,
Defendant-Appellee
______________________
2024-2245
______________________
Appeal from the United States Court of Federal Claims
in No. 1:24-cv-00508-EGB, Senior Judge Eric G. Bruggink.
______________________
ON MOTION
______________________
Before P ROST , BRYSON, and HUGHES , Circuit Judges.
P ER CURIAM .
O R D E R
The United States moves to summarily affirm the final
judgment of the United States Court of Federal Claims dis-
missing Justin Everett’s complaint. Mr. Everett has not
responded. We grant the motion.
In his complaint, Mr. Everett alleges that the federal
government slandered him and violated the Sherman Anti-
Case: 24-2245 Document: 5 Page: 1 Filed: 11/12/2024

-- 1 of 3 --

EVERETT v. US 2
Trust Act, 15 U.S.C. §§ 1–2. The apparent basis of his
claims was that TreasuryDirect, an electronic resource for
buying and redeeming United States Savings Bonds and
other United States backed investments, closed his account
because he “tried to use someone[] else[’s] credentials with
no valid proof.” Compl. at 1. The Court of Federal Claims
granted the government’s motion to dismiss for lack of sub-
ject matter jurisdiction. This appeal followed.
We agree that summary affirmance is appropriate here
because there is “no substantial question regarding the
outcome of the appeal.” Joshua v. United States, 17 F.3d
378, 380 (Fed. Cir. 1994). The Tucker Act provides the
Court of Federal Claims with jurisdiction only over certain
claims for money damages “not sounding in tort” against
the United States. 28 U.S.C. § 1491(a)(1). The Court of
Federal Claims clearly was correct that Mr. Everett’s slan-
der claim sounds in tort and is thus outside that court’s ju-
risdiction. It was also clearly correct that federal district
courts have exclusive jurisdiction over claims of Sherman
Anti-Trust Act violations. See 15 U.S.C. § 15(a). Finally,
the court was clearly correct that Mr. Everett cited nothing
that would mandate money damages against the federal
government for closing a TreasuryDirect account.
Accordingly,
I T I S O RDERED T HAT :
(1) The United States’s motion is granted. The judg-
ment of the Court of Federal Claims is affirmed.
Case: 24-2245 Document: 5 Page: 2 Filed: 11/12/2024

-- 2 of 3 --

EVERETT v. US 3
(2) Each party shall bear its own costs.
November 12, 2024
Date
F OR THE COURT
Case: 24-2245 Document: 5 Page: 3 Filed: 11/12/2024

-- 3 of 3 --