Deile v. United States

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
DISTRICT OF MINNESOTA
DAVID JACOB DEILE,
Plaintiff,
v.
UNITED STATES; U.S. ATTORNEY’S
OFFICE FOR D.C., c/o Civil Process Clerk;
PAM BONDI, U.S. Attorney General; CIVIL
PROCESS CLERK, United States Attorney’s
Office, District of Minnesota; SCOTT
BESSENT, U.S. Treasury Secretary;
BRANDON BEACH, U.S. Treasurer,
Defendants.
Case No. 25ȬCVȬ1019 (PJS/LIB)
ORDER
Plaintiff David Deile brings this action claiming that certain financial accounts
were created using personal information from his deceased parents’ vital records. Deile
seeks to have those accounts liquidated and distributed to “rightful beneficiaries.” ECF
No. 42 at 7.
This matter is before the Court on defendants’ 1 motion to dismiss Deile’s
amended complaint [ECF No. 42]. Pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 12(b)(1) and (b)(6),
1Defendants’ brief in support of their motion to dismiss notes that, “[t]hrough the
meet and confer process, the undersigned understands that Mr. Deile intends to add
Secretary Bessent and Treasurer Beach as defendants, but that the U.S. Attorney’s Office
Civil Process Clerk and Attorney General Bondi are listed so as to convey proper
service on the United States and federal employees named.” ECF No. 45 at 2. Based on
this statement, the Court understands the motion to seek dismissal on behalf of all
defendants identified in the caption of this order.
CASE 0:25-cv-01019-PJS-LIB Doc. 54 Filed 01/12/26 Page 1 of 3

defendants make a factual attack on jurisdiction and argue that the amended complaint
fails to state a claim.
Defendants filed their motion on September 5, 2025. ECF No. 44. 2 Deile’s
response was therefore due on September 26, 2025. D. Minn. L.R. 7.1(c)(2). To date,
Deile has not responded to the motion to dismiss. Having reviewed the amended
complaint, the Court agrees that Deile has not identified any basis for waiving the
sovereign immunity of the United States, much less offered evidence that could
establish a factual basis for such a waiver. See United States v. Mitchell, 463 U.S. 206, 212
(1983) (“It is axiomatic that the United States may not be sued without its consent and
that the existence of consent is a prerequisite for jurisdiction.”); Buford v. Runyon, 160
F.3d 1199, 1203 (8th Cir. 1998) (sovereign immunity applies to the United States, its
agencies, and its officials sued in their official capacities); Moss v. United States, 895 F.3d
1091, 1097 (8th Cir. 2018) (to counter a factual attack on jurisdiction, “the party invoking
federal jurisdiction must prove jurisdictional facts by a preponderance of the
evidence”).
To the extent that Deile intends to bring individualȬcapacity claims against the
individual defendants, he has failed to allege any action or omission by any of them and
2The Court initially struck defendants’ motion for failure to contact the Court for
a hearing date as required by the local rules. ECF No. 50. Later that day, however, the
Court reinstated the motion after defendants secured a hearing date. Id.
-2-
CASE 0:25-cv-01019-PJS-LIB Doc. 54 Filed 01/12/26 Page 2 of 3

has therefore failed to state a claim. Bell Atl. Corp. v. Twombly, 550 U.S. 544, 555 (2007)
(a plaintiff must allege enough facts to “raise a right to relief above the speculative
level”). The Court therefore grants defendants’ motion to dismiss.
ORDER
Based on the foregoing, and on all of the files, records, and proceedings herein,
IT IS HEREBY ORDERED THAT:
1. 	Defendants’ motion to dismiss [ECF No. 44] is GRANTED and the
amended complaint [ECF No. 42] is DISMISSED as follows:
a. 	All claims against defendant United States and any officialȬcapacity
claims against the individual defendants are DISMISSED
WITHOUT PREJUDICE for lack of jurisdiction.
b. 	Any individualȬcapacity claims against the individual defendants
are DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE for failure to state a claim.
2. 	The hearing scheduled for January 21, 2026, is CANCELED.
LET JUDGMENT BE ENTERED ACCORDINGLY.
Dated: January 12, 2026 	/s/ Patrick J. Schiltz
Patrick J. Schiltz, Chief Judge
United States District Court
-3-
CASE 0:25-cv-01019-PJS-LIB Doc. 54 Filed 01/12/26 Page 3 of 3