Martinez
Martinez v. United States
Opinion
Lead Opinion
MEMORANDUM **
Daniel Gabino Martinez appeals pro se from the district court’s judgment dismissing his tort action against the United States for lack of subject matter jurisdiction. We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1291 . We review de novo. Billings v. United States, 57 F.3d 797, 799 (9th Cir.1995) (certification by the Attorney General, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2679 (d)(1), that named defendant was federal employee acting within the scope of her employment). We affirm.
Martinez filed this action in Arizona state court against employees of the United States Forest Service, alleging unlawful seizure of his cattle.
“When a federal employee is sued for wrongful or negligent conduct, the [West-fall] Act empowers the Attorney General to certify that the employee was acting within the scope of his office or employment. ... [T]he United States is substituted as defendant in place of the employee. The litigation is thereafter governed by the Federal Tort Claims Act (“FTCA”). If the action commenced in state court, the case is to be removed to a federal district court, and the certification remains conclusive for purposes of removal.” Osborn v. Haley, 549 U.S. 225, 229-30 ,…