Deweese v. United States

• Court: Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit
• Decided: March 20, 2026
• Docket: 26-1349
• Status: Unpublished

Opinion

Case: 26-1349 Document: 13 Page: 1 Filed: 03/20/2026

NOTE: This order is nonprecedential.

United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit ______________________

LISA ANN DEWEESE, Plaintiff-Appellant

v.

UNITED STATES, Defendant-Appellee ______________________

2026-1349 ______________________

Appeal from the United States Court of Federal Claims in No. 1:25-cv-01972-DAT, Judge David A. Tapp. ______________________

ON MOTION ______________________

Before DYK, REYNA, and HUGHES, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM. ORDER The United States moves for summary affirmance. Lisa Ann Deweese has not filed a response though she has filed her opening brief. Ms. Deweese filed a complaint at the United States Court of Federal Claims alleging “Child Protective Ser- vices” has violated various statutes including the False Case: 26-1349 Document: 13 Page: 2 Filed: 03/20/2026

Claims Act. This complaint appears to be related to her earlier complaint, dismissed for lack of subject matter ju- risdiction, which sought relief based on child custody pro- ceedings in New Mexico regarding Ms. Deweese’s child. See Deweese v. United States, No. 2024-1791, 2024 WL 5002116 (Fed. Cir. Dec. 6, 2024). In this case, the Court of Federal Claims similarly dismissed Ms. Deweese’s com- plaint for lack of jurisdiction and failure to state a claim. Summary affirmance is appropriate where the judg- ment is “so clearly correct as a matter of law that no sub- stantial question regarding the outcome of the appeal exists.” Joshua v. United States, 17 F.3d 378, 380 (Fed. Cir. 1994). Here, the Court of Federal Claims was clearly correct in dismissing Ms. Deweese’s complaint at least be- cause she has failed to raise any non-frivolous allegations against the United States. See United States v. Sherwood, 312 U.S. 584, 588 (1941) (“[I]f the relief sought is against others than the United States the suit as to them must be ignored as beyond the jurisdiction of the court[.]”). As that court explained, Ms. Deweese’s complaint is directed against “Child Protective Services,” which is not a federal entity. See Dkt. No. 7 at 2–3 & n.2. Instead, she continues to seek relief against state agencies and officials, which the Court of Federal Claims lacks jurisdiction to consider. See Deweese, No. 2024-1791, 2024 WL 5002116 at *2 (citing 28 U.S.C. § 1491). Accordingly, IT IS ORDERED THAT: (1) The motion is granted, and the Court of Federal Claims’s judgment is summarily affirmed. (2) Any other pending motions are denied. Case: 26-1349 Document: 13 Page: 3 Filed: 03/20/2026

DEWEESE v. US 3

(3) Each party shall bear its own costs. FOR THE COURT

March 20, 2026 Date