Michael John Bui v. U.S. Attorney's Office


PER CURIAM OPINION FILED - THE COURT: Roger L. Wollman, Pasco M. Bowman and Diana E. Murphy (UNPUBLISHED) [4395273] [15-3640]

Download PDF
United States Court of Appeals For the Eighth Circuit ___________________________ No. 15-3640 ___________________________ Michael John Bui lllllllllllllllllllll Plaintiff - Appellant v. U.S. Attorney’s Office lllllllllllllllllllll Defendant - Appellee ____________ Appeal from United States District Court for the District of Minnesota - Minneapolis ____________ Submitted: May 2, 2016 Filed: May 4, 2016 [Unpublished] ____________ Before WOLLMAN, BOWMAN, and MURPHY, Circuit Judges. ____________ PER CURIAM. Appellate Case: 15-3640 Page: 1 Date Filed: 05/04/2016 Entry ID: 4395273 Michael Bui appeals after the District Court1 dismissed his petition for a writ of mandamus. Upon careful de novo review, see Hart v. United States, 630 F.3d 1085, 1088 (8th Cir. 2011) (reviewing de novo the dismissal of a complaint for lack of subject-matter jurisdiction based on sovereign immunity), we conclude that dismissal was proper, see Borntrager v. Stevas, 772 F.2d 419, 420 (8th Cir.) (“[M]andamus may issue against an officer of the United States only when the plaintiff has a clear right to relief, the defendant has a clear duty to perform the act in question, and the plaintiff has no adequate alternative remedy.”), cert. denied, 474 U.S. 1008 (1985); see also Ashcroft v. Iqbal, 556 U.S. 662, 678 (2009) (noting that a pleading “must contain sufficient factual matter” to state a claim that is plausible on its face in order to avoid dismissal); In re Lombardi, 741 F.3d 888, 893–94 (8th Cir.) (en banc) (explaining the standards for granting a petition for writ of mandamus), cert. denied, 134 S. Ct. 1790 (2014). Accordingly, we affirm. ______________________________ 1 The Honorable John R. Tunheim, Chief Judge, United States District Court for the District of Minnesota, adopting the report and recommendations of the Honorable Franklin L. Noel, United States Magistrate Judge for the District of Minnesota. -2- Appellate Case: 15-3640 Page: 2 Date Filed: 05/04/2016 Entry ID: 4395273

Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.

Why Is My Information Online?