Samuel Kent v. Darryl Lacounte
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitApril 8, 202422-70013California948 words
Opinion
Opinion
NOT FOR PUBLICATION FILED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS APR 8 2024
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U.S. COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
SAMUEL JAMES KENT, No. 22-70013
Petitioner, DOI No. OI-PI-21-0685-I
v.
DARRYL LACOUNTE, Director of the MEMORANDUM* United States Bureau of Indian Affairs; DEB HAALAND, Secretary of the United States Department of the Interior; BUREAU
OF INDIAN AFFAIRS; U.S.
DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR,
Respondents.
On Petition for Review of an Order of the Department of Interior
Argued and Submitted March 11, 2024 San Francisco, California
Before: S. R. THOMAS, McKEOWN, and CHRISTEN, Circuit Judges.
Samuel Kent petitions for review of the Bureau of Indian Affairs’ (BIA)
order denying his whistleblower retaliation complaint filed pursuant to 41 U.S.C.
§ 4712(c). The BIA’s order concluded that, “[u]pon legal review, it is clear that
* This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3. U.S.C. § 4712 does not apply to Indian Self-Determination and Education