Ware
Ware v. United States Department of the Interior
Opinion
Lead Opinion
MEMORANDUM **
Michael R. Ware appeals pro se from the district court’s order dismissing his *628 action alleging, inter alia, claims under the Federal Tort Claims Act (“FTCA”) and the Privacy Act, and designating him a vexatious litigant. We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1291 . After de novo review, Clinton v. Babbitt, 180 F.3d 1081, 1086 (9th Cir.1999), we affirm.
The district court properly concluded that it lacked jurisdiction to consider Ware’s FTCA claims because he did not timely file his action in district court. See Berti v. V.A. Hosp., 860 F.2d 338, 340 (9th Cir.1988) (motion for reconsideration prevents the agency’s denial from becoming a final denial for purposes of 28 U.S.C. § 2401 (b) and tolls the six-month limitation period until either the [agency] responds or six more months pass.) (emphasis added).
The district court also properly concluded that Ware’s Privacy Act claims were barred by the statute of limitations. See 5 U.S.C. § 552a(g)(5); Rose v. United States, 905 F.2d 1257, 1259 (9th Cir.1990) (applying two-year statute of limitation).
The district court also properly dismissed Ware’s constitutional tort claims against the United States, its…