LEJI v. UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY (2019)

United States Court of Appeals, District of Columbia Circuit.

Victor LEJI, Appellant v. UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY, et al., Appellees

No. 18-5278

Decided: January 29, 2019

BEFORE: Griffith and Katsas, Circuit Judges, and Sentelle, Senior Circuit Judge Victor Leji, Washington, DC, pro se. R. Craig Lawrence, U.S. Attorney's Office, Washington, DC, for Appellees.

JUDGMENT

This appeal was considered on the record from the United States District Court for the District of Columbia and on the brief and appendix filed by appellant. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2); D.C. Cir. Rule 34(j). It is

ORDERED AND ADJUDGED that the district court's August 20, 2018 order dismissing appellant's complaint be affirmed. The district court correctly concluded that appellant's factual allegations of pervasive government surveillance were “fanciful,” see Neitzke v. Williams, 490 U.S. 319, 325, 109 S.Ct. 1827, 104 L.Ed.2d 338 (1989) (“[A] complaint ․ is frivolous where it lacks an arguable basis either in law or in fact.”), and that the court lacked authority to review decisions of appellate courts and other district courts, see 28 U.S.C. § 1294(1) (appeal from a reviewable decision of a district court shall be taken to the court of appeals for the circuit “embracing the district”); Lance v. Dennis, 546 U.S. 459, 463, 126 S.Ct. 1198, 163 L.Ed.2d 1059 (2006) (“[L]ower federal courts are precluded from exercising appellate jurisdiction over final state-court judgments.”).

Pursuant to D.C. Circuit Rule 36, this disposition will not be published. The Clerk is directed to withhold issuance of the mandate herein until seven days after resolution of any timely petition for rehearing or petition for rehearing en banc. See Fed. R. App. P. 41(b); D.C. Cir. Rule 41.

Per Curiam