John Dugas v. United States

N OTE: This order is nonprecedential.
United States Court of Appeals
for the Federal Circuit
______________________
JOHN DUGAS,
Plaintiff-Appellant
v.
UNITED STATES,
Defendant-Appellee
______________________
2025-1134
______________________
Appeal from the United States Court of Federal Claims
in No. 1:24-cv-01485-CNL, Judge Carolyn N. Lerner.
______________________
ON MOTION
______________________
Before D YK, CUNNINGHAM , and STARK, Circuit Judges.
P ER CURIAM .
O R D E R
John Dugas moves for various relief, including “to ex-
pedite emergency request with summary judgment” for
“the monetary amount of $26 Trillion or More.” ECF
No. 18 at 2 (cleaned up). The United States moves for sum-
mary affirmance. ECF No. 34.
Case: 25-1134 Document: 38 Page: 1 Filed: 01/14/2025

-- 1 of 3 --

DUGAS v. US 2
Mr. Dugas filed his complaint at the United States
Court of Federal Claims against the City of New York and
Departments of City Government alleging they were “oper-
ating in a criminal manner.” Dkt. No. 1 at 2. The Court of
Federal Claims dismissed the case, concluding that the
court lacked jurisdiction over Mr. Dugas’s claims against
state and local government entities and his allegations of
violations of criminal law.
Summary disposition is appropriate because the Court
of Federal Claims’s judgment “is so clearly correct as a mat-
ter of law that no substantial question regarding the out-
come of the appeal exists.” Joshua v. United States, 17 F.3d
378, 380 (Fed. Cir. 1994). For Mr. Dugas’s claims against
New York state and local entities, “if the relief sought is
against others than the United States the suit as to them
must be ignored as beyond the jurisdiction of the [Court of
Federal Claims],” United States v. Sherwood, 312 U.S. 584,
588 (1941). And for his allegations of violations of criminal
law, the Court of Federal Claims “has no jurisdiction to ad-
judicate any claims whatsoever under the federal criminal
code,” Joshua, 17 F.3d at 379.
Accordingly,
Case: 25-1134 Document: 38 Page: 2 Filed: 01/14/2025

-- 2 of 3 --

DUGAS v. US 3
I T I S O RDERED T HAT :
(1) The motion for summary affirmance is granted,
and the judgment of the United States Court of Federal
Claims is summarily affirmed.
(2) All other motions are denied.
(3) Each party shall bear its own costs.
January 14, 2025
Date
F OR THE COURT
Case: 25-1134 Document: 38 Page: 3 Filed: 01/14/2025

-- 3 of 3 --