David F. Razo v. U.S. Veterans Administration

2 F.3d 1157 NOTICE: Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3 provides that dispositions other than opinions or orders designated for publication are not precedential and should not be cited except when relevant under the doctrines of law of the case, res judicata, or collateral estoppel. David F. RAZO, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. U.S. VETERANS ADMINISTRATION, Defendant-Appellee. No. 92-56585. United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit. Submitted June 25, 1993. * Decided July 8, 1993. Before CANBY, FERNANDEZ and T.G. NELSON, Circuit Judges. 1 MEMORANDUM ** 2 David Razo appeals pro se the district court's dismissal without prejudice for lack of jurisdiction of his action against the United States Veterans Administration ("VA"). We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. Sec. 1291 . 1 We review de novo a district court's dismissal for lack of subject matter jurisdiction. Kruso v. International Tel. & Tel. Corp., 872 F.2d 1416 , 1421 (9th Cir.1989), cert. denied, 496 U.S. 937 (1990). We affirm. 3 Razo filed a complaint claiming the VA should have increased his benefits for injuries he allegedly suffered while in the military. 2 The government moved to dismiss pursuant to Fed.R.Civ.P. 12(b)(1) &…