Lance McDermott v. John Potter, et al, No. 09-35999 (9th Cir. 2011)

Annotate this Case

Download PDF

FILED JAN 07 2011 NOT FOR PUBLICATION UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK U .S. C O U R T OF APPE ALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT LANCE McDERMOTT, Plaintiff - Appellant, No. 09-35999 D.C. No. 2:09-cv-00776-RSL v. MEMORANDUM ** PATRICK R. DONAHUE, Postmaster General United States Postal Service; et al.,* Defendants - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Washington Robert S. Lasnik, Chief District Judge, Presiding Submitted December 14, 2010 *** Before: GOODWIN, WALLACE, and THOMAS, Circuit Judges. * Patrick R. Donahue is substituted for his predecessor, John Potter, as Postmaster General, under Fed. R. App. P. 43(c)(2). ** 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). Lance McDermott appeals pro se from the district court s judgment dismissing his action concerning the closure of a postal facility, for lack of jurisdiction and failure to state a claim. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291. We review de novo. Rhoades v. Avon Prods., Inc., 504 F.3d 1151, 1156 (9th Cir. 2007). We affirm. The district court properly dismissed McDermott s claims under the Freedom of Information Act ( FOIA ) for lack of subject matter jurisdiction. See United States v. Steele (In re Steele), 799 F.2d 461, 465-66 (9th Cir. 1986) (failure to exhaust administrative remedies required under FOIA before seeking judicial review deprives district court of jurisdiction). The district court properly dismissed McDermott s remaining claims for lack of standing because the injuries he alleged were merely conjectural and hypothetical. City of Los Angeles v. Lyons, 461 U.S. 95, 102 (1983). McDermott s remaining contentions are unpersuasive. AFFIRMED. 2 09-35999

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.