Legal Opinion
Gust v. United States
District Court, District of Columbia
Decided June 6, 2011No. 1:10-cr-00252PublishedCited by 5 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
MEMORANDUM OPINION
AMY BERMAN JACKSON, District Judge.
Before the Court is defendant’s motion to dismiss under Federal Rules of Civil Procedure 12(b)(1) and 12(b)(6). Defendant contends that the Court lacks subject matter jurisdiction over three counts in the complaint and that plaintiff fails to state a claim upon which relief can be granted for the remaining three counts. For the reasons stated below, defendant’s motion to dismiss will be granted.
BACKGROUND
Plaintiff Thomas E. Gust, proceeding pro se, brings this action against defendant, the United States of America, alleging six counts under…
2Cases cited32 opinions
- Ashcroft v. IqbalSupreme Court of the United States · 2009
- Bell Atlantic Corp. v. TwomblySupreme Court of the United States · 2007
- Haines v. KernerSupreme Court of the United States · 1972
- Lujan v. Defenders of WildlifeSupreme Court of the United States · 1992
- Kokkonen v. Guardian Life Insurance Co. of AmericaSupreme Court of the United States · 1994
27 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by5 opinions
- Bickford v. Government of the United States of AmericaDistrict Court, District of Columbia · 2011
- Clayton v. District of ColumbiaDistrict Court, District of Columbia · 2015
- Cyrus-Osborne v. Internal Revenue ServiceDistrict Court, District of Columbia · 2013
- Malone v. Department of the TreasuryDistrict Court, W.D. Kentucky · 2020
- Smith v. United StatesDistrict Court, District of Columbia · 2014