Ross v. United States
United States Court of Federal Claims
1Opinion of the Court
Pro Se; Rule 12(b)(1); Subject-Matter Jurisdiction
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
LYDIA KAY GRIGGSBY, Judge
I. INTRODUCTION
Pro se plaintiff, Michael S. Ross, brought this action pursuant to the Social Security Act, 42 U.S.C. §§ 301-1397mm (2012), seeking monetary damages related to his social security retirement benefits. The government moved, pursuant to Rule 12(b)(1) of the Rules of the United States Court of Federal Claims (“RCFC”), to dismiss plaintiffs complaint for lack of subject-matter jurisdiction. For the reasons set forth below, the Court GRANTS the government’s motion to dismiss.
II.…
2Cases cited27 opinions
- Haines v. KernerSupreme Court of the United States · 1972
- Steel Co. v. Citizens for a Better EnvironmentSupreme Court of the United States · 1998
- Arbaugh v. Y & H Corp.Supreme Court of the United States · 2006
- United States v. TestanSupreme Court of the United States · 1976
- Karen S. Reynolds v. Army and Air Force Exchange ServiceCourt of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 1988
22 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by9 opinions
- Price v. United StatesUnited States Court of Federal Claims · 2015
- Double Lion Uchet Express Trust v. United StatesUnited States Court of Federal Claims · 2020
- Feist v. United StatesUnited States Court of Federal Claims · 2020
- Haque v. United StatesUnited States Court of Federal Claims · 2016
- Hunt v. United StatesUnited States Court of Federal Claims · 2020
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.