159 F. Supp. 3d 56
D.D.C.2016Background
- Sara Thompson, a pro se plaintiff, served as a Peace Corps volunteer in Burkina Faso (sworn in August 2010) and alleges neurological injuries from taking the anti-malarial drug mefloquine provided during training in Burkina Faso.
- Thompson claims Peace Corps required or effectively pressured volunteers to take mefloquine, dispensed it in a loading-dose regimen contrary to CDC guidance, and failed to warn her adequately of risks.
- She alleges ongoing cognitive and vestibular symptoms since service and seeks damages for negligence and related torts; she filed suit in D.D.C. and amended her complaint.
- Peace Corps moved to dismiss under Fed. R. Civ. P. 12(b)(1) (lack of subject-matter jurisdiction) and 12(b)(6) (failure to state a claim); plaintiff conceded FTCA is her likely vehicle but also invoked the Peace Corps Act.
- The court treated the claims as asserted under the Federal Tort Claims Act (FTCA) and considered whether FTCA exceptions (notably the foreign-country exception and misrepresentation exception) bar jurisdiction.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the court has jurisdiction under the FTCA despite injuries occurring overseas | Thompson: injuries traceable to Peace Corps’ conduct in the U.S. (pre-departure counseling/communications), so FTCA foreign-country exception shouldn’t bar suit | Peace Corps: FTCA’s foreign-country exception bars any claim arising in a foreign country regardless of where the tortious act occurred | Court: Dismissed for lack of jurisdiction under FTCA §2680(k); Sosa controls, barring claims for injuries suffered abroad |
| Whether misrepresentation or failure-to-warn claims are exempt from FTCA waiver | Thompson: Peace Corps failed to disclose risks pre-departure, asserting negligent/fraudulent misrepresentation and failure-to-warn | Peace Corps: Misrepresentation claims are excluded from FTCA waiver under §2680(h) in any event | Court: Misrepresentation claims are barred by FTCA exception; jurisdiction still lacking |
| Whether the Peace Corps Act creates a private right of action against the United States | Thompson: Relies on Peace Corps Act provisions and contends volunteers should be able to sue under the statute | Peace Corps: The Act merely deems volunteers to be federal employees for FTCA purposes; it does not waive sovereign immunity or create an independent cause of action | Court: Peace Corps Act does not create a private right or waiver; no independent cause of action against the United States |
| Whether pro se status alters jurisdictional outcome or merits leave to amend | Thompson: Pro se and provided extra statutory/case citations; argues equities favor proceeding | Peace Corps: No substantive rebuttal to jurisdictional bars; exceptions are jurisdictional and dispositive | Court: Pro se status considered but FTCA exceptions are jurisdictional and dispositive; dismissal granted without finding a cognizable federal remedy |
Key Cases Cited
- Sosa v. Alvarez-Machain, 542 U.S. 692 (2004) (FTCA foreign-country exception bars claims for injuries suffered abroad regardless of where tortious acts occurred)
- Lujan v. Defenders of Wildlife, 504 U.S. 555 (1992) (plaintiff bears burden to establish federal jurisdiction by preponderance)
- Ashcroft v. Iqbal, 556 U.S. 662 (2009) (plausibility standard for Rule 12(b)(6) pleading)
- Bell Atl. Corp. v. Twombly, 550 U.S. 544 (2007) (complaint must state a plausible claim, not mere conclusory allegations)
- Kokkonen v. Guardian Life Ins. Co. of Am., 511 U.S. 375 (1994) (federal courts are courts of limited jurisdiction; jurisdiction cannot be conferred by parties)
- Richards v. United States, 369 U.S. 1 (1962) (FTCA was designed to waive sovereign immunity in tort with specified exceptions)