Ghaffari v. United States
125 Fed. Cl. 665
Fed. Cl.2016Background
- Plaintiff Shahir Mehdi Ghaffari, pro se, sued the United States alleging IRS misconduct and sought damages and injunctive/declaratory relief under the Privacy Act, Bivens (constitutional torts), 28 U.S.C. §§ 2201/2202, and 26 U.S.C. § 7431 (disclosure of return information).
- Complaint asserted three counts: (1) Privacy Act violations (5 U.S.C. § 552a); (2) Bivens claims against federal officials plus declaratory/injunctive relief against IRS/Treasury under §§ 2201/2202 for alleged First and Fifth Amendment violations; (3) damages under § 7431 for impermissible disclosure under § 6103.
- Defendant moved to dismiss for lack of subject-matter jurisdiction; the Court of Federal Claims reviewed whether it had authority to hear each claim under the Tucker Act and related jurisdictional principles.
- Court reviewed controlling Federal Circuit and Supreme Court precedent about the Court of Federal Claims’ limited jurisdiction (suits against the United States, not individual officials) and statutory venue for tax-disclosure claims.
- Plaintiff also attempted to assert claims on behalf of an associated startup/company; the court noted a pro se individual may not represent a corporation before the court.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the Court of Federal Claims has jurisdiction over a Privacy Act claim | Ghaffari sought damages/injunctive relief under the Privacy Act for IRS information requests | United States: this court lacks jurisdiction over Privacy Act claims; they must be brought elsewhere | Dismissed for lack of jurisdiction (court lacks Privacy Act jurisdiction) |
| Whether Bivens claims against federal officials can proceed in this court | Ghaffari alleged constitutional violations by federal officials and sought damages under Bivens | United States: Tucker Act confers jurisdiction over suits against the United States, not individual federal officials | Dismissed for lack of jurisdiction (Bivens actions not cognizable in this court) |
| Whether declaratory and injunctive relief under 28 U.S.C. §§ 2201/2202 is available here | Ghaffari sought declaratory/injunctive relief against IRS/Treasury for constitutional violations | United States: the Court of Federal Claims lacks power to entertain declaratory judgment actions under § 2201/2202 | Dismissed for lack of jurisdiction (court cannot grant relief under §§ 2201/2202) |
| Whether claims under 26 U.S.C. § 7431 for wrongful disclosure of tax return information may be heard here | Ghaffari sought damages for alleged § 6103 disclosure under § 7431 | United States: § 7431 actions must be brought in a U.S. district court, not the Court of Federal Claims | Dismissed for lack of jurisdiction (§ 7431 claims belong in district court) |
Key Cases Cited
- Bivens v. Six Unknown Named Agents of the Federal Bureau of Narcotics, 403 U.S. 388 (1971) (establishes personal-capacity constitutional tort actions against federal officials)
- Brown v. United States, 105 F.3d 621 (Fed. Cir. 1997) (Court of Federal Claims lacks jurisdiction over Bivens actions)
- Public Serv. Co. of Colorado v. United States, 2 Cl. Ct. 380 (1983) (Court of Claims lacks power to award declaratory judgments under 28 U.S.C. § 2201)
- Calhoun v. United States, 32 Fed. Cl. 400 (1994) (actions under 26 U.S.C. § 7431 are not cognizable in the Court of Federal Claims)