Unpublished Disposition, 940 F.2d 1533 (9th Cir. 1991)

 Annotate this Case
U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit - 940 F.2d 1533 (9th Cir. 1991)

Jeffrey S. BALAWAJDER, Petitioner-Appellant,v.Spencer WILLIAMS, District Court Judge, William L.Whittaker, Cora G. Barao, U.S. Postal Service,Respondents-Appellees.

No. 90-15167.

United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.

Submitted July 29, 1991.* Decided Aug. 1, 1991.

Before FARRIS, ALARCON and THOMAS G. NELSON, Circuit Judges.

MEMORANDUM** 

Jeffrey S. Balawajder appeals pro se the district court's sua sponte dismissal of his civil rights complaint pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(d). Balawajder named as defendants Judge Spencer Williams, district court clerks, and the United States Postal Service, and sought damages for improper dismissal of his claims, wrongful denial of forms required to file suit, mishandling of his pleadings, and improper delivery of his certified mail to the district court. We affirm.

The district court properly determined that the judge and court clerks, who were performing acts that are integral parts of the judicial process, have absolute judicial immunity. See Ashelman v. Pope, 793 F.2d 1072, 1075-76 (9th Cir. 1986) (en banc) (judicial immunity); Mullis v. United States Bankruptcy Court, 828 F.2d 1385, 1390, 1394 (9th Cir. 1987) (court clerks), cert. denied, 486 U.S. 1040 (1988). In addition, the district court properly determined that to the extent Balawajder attempted to assert a Federal Tort Claims Act ("FTCA") suit against the United States Postal Service for negligent mail delivery, the United States has not waived its sovereign immunity for claims "arising out of the loss, miscarriage, or negligent transmission of letters or postal matter." See 28 U.S.C. § 2680(b); Anderson v. United States Postal Serv., 761 F.2d 527, 528 (9th Cir. 1985).1 

AFFIRMED.

 *

The panel unanimously finds this case suitable for decision without oral argument. Fed. R. App. P. 34(a) and Ninth Cir.R. 34-4

 **

This disposition is not appropriate for publication and may not be cited to or by the courts of this circuit except as provided by 9th Cir.R. 36-3

 1

On appeal, Balawajder apparently concedes that the Postal Service is not subject to suit under the FTCA, but argues that he should be allowed to assert a Bivens claim. Nevertheless, negligent delivery of mail is not a constitutional violation cognizable in a Bivens action. See F.E. Trotter, Inc. v. Watkins, 869 F.2d 1312, 1314 (9th Cir. 1989) (Bivens actions available only for constitutional violations)

Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.