Randy Wiggins v. United States Government

NOT FOR PUBLICATION
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
RANDY WIGGINS,
Plaintiff-Appellant,
v.
UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT,
Defendant-Appellee.
No. 20-55994
D.C. No. 2:16-cv-08309-PSG-FFM
MEMORANDUM*
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Central District of California
Philip S. Gutierrez, District Judge, Presiding
Submitted September 14, 2021 **
Before: PAEZ, NGUYEN, and OWENS, Circuit Judges.
Randy Wiggins appeals pro se from the district court’s judgment dismissing
his action brought under the Federal Tort Claims Act (“FTCA”). We have
jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291. We review de novo a dismissal for lack of
subject matter jurisdiction under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b)(1). Serra
* This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent
except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.
** The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision
without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2).
FILED
SEP 20 2021
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U.S. COURT OF APPEALS

-- 1 of 2 --

2 20-55994
v. Lappin, 600 F.3d 1191, 1195 (9th Cir. 2010). We affirm.
The district court properly dismissed Wiggins’s action for lack of subject
matter jurisdiction because Wiggins failed to exhaust his administrative remedies
prior to bringing suit. See 28 U.S.C. § 2675(a) (setting forth the FTCA’s
administrative exhaustion requirement); McNeil v. United States, 508 U.S. 106,
113 (1993) (the FTCA bars a claimant from bringing suit in federal court unless
the claimant has first exhausted administrative remedies).
We do not consider matters not specifically and distinctly raised and argued
in the opening brief, or arguments and allegations raised for the first time on
appeal. See Padgett v. Wright, 587 F.3d 983, 985 n.2 (9th Cir. 2009).
All pending motions are denied.
AFFIRMED.

-- 2 of 2 --