22:I[98912,["/_next/static/chunks/0asocxi83kb~5.js","/_next/static/chunks/0n4z.7yu76je-.js","/_next/static/chunks/0eyt_ou8dj52g.js","/_next/static/chunks/01bcia3bjqt9z.js","/_next/static/chunks/15egrlmmf_yst.js"],"CaseDetailGate"] 23:T482,MEMORANDUM Security National Insurance Company appeals the district court’s denial of its motion to intervene in a Federal Tort Claim Act action filed by Robyn and Sterling Holloway. We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1291 and review de novo. Vacek v. U.S. Postal Serv., 447 F.3d 1248, 1250 (9th Cir.2006); Canatella v. California, 404 F.3d 1106, 1112 (9th Cir.2005). We affirm. The district court properly denied for lack of subject matter jurisdiction the insurance company’s request to intervene because no party filed an administrative claim on behalf of the insurance company. See 28 U.S.C. § 2675 (a); McNeil v. United States, 508 U.S. 106, 113 , 113 S.Ct. 1980 , 124 L.Ed.2d 21 (1993); Brady v. United States, 211 F.3d 499, 502 (9th Cir.2000). Because the filing of an administrative claim pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2675 (a) is jurisdictional, Security National’s arguments that it could intervene under the various rules of civil procedure lack merit. See Fed,R.Civ.P. 82; Canatella, 404 F.3d at 1113 . AFFIRMED. This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.24:T4af,

MEMORANDUM

Security National Insurance Company appeals the district court’s denial of its motion to intervene in a Federal Tort Claim Act action filed by Robyn and Sterling Holloway. We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1291 and review de novo. Vacek v. U.S. Postal Serv., 447 F.3d 1248, 1250 (9th Cir.2006); Canatella v. California, 404 F.3d 1106, 1112 (9th Cir.2005). We affirm.

The district court properly denied for lack of subject matter jurisdiction the insurance company’s request to intervene because no party filed an administrative claim on behalf of the insurance company. See 28 U.S.C. § 2675 (a); McNeil v. United States, 508 U.S. 106, 113 , 113 S.Ct. 1980 , 124 L.Ed.2d 21 (1993); Brady v. United States, 211 F.3d 499, 502 (9th Cir.2000). Because the filing of an administrative claim pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2675 (a) is jurisdictional, Security National’s arguments that it could intervene under the various rules of civil procedure lack merit. See Fed,R.Civ.P. 82; Canatella, 404 F.3d at 1113 .

AFFIRMED.

This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.