Kourouma v. Anchill, 2:24-cv-13278

Salif A. Kourouma filed suit in Michigan state court against Assistant U.S. Attorney Benjamin A. Anchill and the Department of Justice (DOJ), seeking recovery of funds related to child support, IRS, and Social Security benefits.
The case was removed to federal court by Anchill pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1442(a)(1), which allows federal officers to remove lawsuits against them to federal court.
Kourouma's handwritten complaint was difficult to decipher but essentially sought to stop garnishment for child support and recover funds, plus relief related to his employment and disability benefits.
The government moved to dismiss, arguing lack of subject matter jurisdiction (no waiver of sovereign immunity) and failure to state a claim.
Kourouma has a history of similar lawsuits against federal agencies, all previously dismissed for lack of jurisdiction.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Sovereign immunity (DOJ as defendant)	DOJ should pay/recover child support, IRS, and Social Security.	No waiver of sovereign immunity pleaded.	Claim dismissed; no sovereign immunity waiver.
Failure to state a claim (Anchill as defendant)	Anchill should help recover/pay funds to plaintiff.	No facts or cause of action alleged against Anchill.	No cognizable claim stated; dismissed.

In re Harchar, 694 F.3d 639 (6th Cir. 2012) (Claims against federal agencies require a clear waiver of sovereign immunity)
F.A.A. v. Cooper, 566 U.S. 284 (2012) (Sovereign immunity waivers must be unequivocally expressed in statutory text)
Bell Atl. Corp. v. Twombly, 550 U.S. 544 (2007) (Complaint must state a plausible claim for relief)
Estelle v. Gamble, 429 U.S. 97 (1976) (Pro se complaints may be dismissed if no set of facts would entitle plaintiff to relief)