Kevin L. Olson v. United States of America, No. 17-1770 (8th Cir. 2017)
Annotate this CaseCourt Description: Per Curiam - Before Benton, Bowman and Kelly, Circuit Judges] Civil case. The district court did not err in dismissing plaintiff's complaint challenging the constitutionality of provisions of the Affordable Care Act, the FICA and the Self-Employment Contributions Act.
Download PDF
United States Court of Appeals For the Eighth Circuit ___________________________ No. 17-1770 ___________________________ Kevin L. Olson lllllllllllllllllllll Plaintiff - Appellant v. Social Security Administration, Nancy A. Berryhill, Acting Commissioner; Department of Treasury, Steven T. Mnuchin, Secretary of the Treasury lllllllllllllllllllll llllllllllllllllllll Defendants United States of America lllllllllllllllllll Defendant-Appellee ____________ Appeal from United States District Court for the District of North Dakota - Fargo ____________ Submitted: December 19, 2017 Filed: December 28, 2017 [Unpublished] ____________ Before BENTON, BOWMAN, and KELLY, Circuit Judges. ____________ PER CURIAM. Kevin Olson challenges the district court’s1 dismissal of his complaint challenging the constitutionality of provisions of the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act, the Federal Insurance Contributions Act, and the Self-Employment Contributions Act. After careful review, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. See Butler v. Bank of Am., N.A., 690 F.3d 959, 961 (8th Cir. 2012) (de novo review of dismissal of complaint for failure to state claim). The judgment is affirmed. See 8th Cir. R. 47B. Appellee’s motions to strike are granted, and Olson’s motion to take judicial notice is denied. ______________________________ 1 The Honorable Ralph R. Erickson, then United States District Judge for the District of North Dakota, now United States Circuit Judge; adopting the report and recommendations of the Honorable Alice R. Senechal, United States Magistrate Judge for the District of North Dakota. -2-
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.
