Robert L. Tatum, on behalf of Blacks (African Americans) v. United States of America

United States Court of Appeals
For the Seventh Circuit
Chicago, Illinois 60604
Submitted February 3, 2016*
Decided February 3, 2016
Before
DANIEL A. MANION, Circuit Judge
ILANA DIAMOND ROVNER, Circuit Judge
DAVID F. HAMILTON, Circuit Judge
No. 15‐3291
ROBERT L. TATUM, on behalf of Blacks
(African Americans),
Plaintiff‐Appellant,
v.
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Defendant‐Appellee.
Appeal from the United States District
Court for the Eastern District of Wisconsin.
No. 15‐CV‐00453
Rudolph T. Randa,
Judge.
O R D E R
Robert Tatum, a Wisconsin inmate, sued the United States demanding redress for
all descendants of persons brought from Africa as slaves before the Civil War. The
district court dismissed the suit without prejudice at screening, see 28 U.S.C. § 1915A,
and we affirm that decision.
* The United States was not served with process in the district court and is not
participating in this appeal. After examining the appellant’s brief and the record, we
have concluded that oral argument is unnecessary. Thus the appeal is submitted on the
brief and the record. See FED. R. A PP. P. 34(a)(2)(C).
NONPRECEDENTIAL DISPOSITION
To be cited only in accordance with Fed. R. App. P. 32.1

-- 1 of 2 --

No. 15‐3291 Page 2
Putting aside the obstacle of sovereign immunity, see, e.g., United States v. Bormes,
133 S.Ct. 12, 16 (2012), Tatum lacks standing to sue for wrongs inflicted on third parties.
Even if Tatum himself is a descendant of slaves (an allegation he never makes in his
complaint), a plaintiff cannot pursue claims belonging to his ancestors whether or not
the wrongs done to the ancestors have injured the plaintiff indirectly. In re African–
American Slave Descendants Litig., 471 F.3d 754, 759–60, 762 (7th Cir. 2006); Cato v.
United States, 70 F.3d 1103, 1109–10 (9th Cir. 1995); see also Alexander v. Oklahoma,
382 F.3d 1206, 1215–20 (10th Cir. 2004) (explaining that claims brought by victims and
their descendants for injuries incurred during a 1920s race riot were barred by statute of
limitations).
In view of our decision in In re African–American Slave Descendants Litigation,
this appeal is frivolous and counts as one of Tatum’s allotted strikes under the Prison
Litigation Reform Act. See 28 U.S.C. § 1915(g). We caution Tatum that if he incurs three
strikes he will be required to prepay all filing fees for future civil litigation unless he
“is under imminent danger of serious physical injury.” Id.; see Kalinowski v. Bond,
358 F.3d 978, 979 (7th Cir. 2004).
AFFIRMED.

-- 2 of 2 --