JURGEN ROGERS v. UNITED STATES POSTAL OFFICE, et al.

Background

Jurgen Rogers initially sued the United States Postal Service and Louis DeJoy, identified in the opinion as a former Postmaster General. Rogers asserted claims under the Federal Tort Claims Act. The court dismissed his original complaint in July 2025 because it did not adequately allege that he had exhausted the required administrative remedies. Rogers then filed an amended complaint, and the defendants moved to dismiss again.

Rogers alleged that, over an unspecified period, his mail carrier deliberately and systematically failed to deliver his mail properly and harassed him with defamatory and derogatory language. He also alleged that an altercation occurred on or about June 20, 2023. According to the amended complaint, Rogers asked the mail carrier for his mail, accused him of failing to deliver mail every day, and was then subjected to profane names, an attempted closing of the mail-truck door against him, threats, and mocking. Rogers filed a police report after the incident.

The amended complaint asserted Federal Tort Claims Act claims for intentional and negligent infliction of emotional distress, harassment, assault, trespass to chattels, violations of federal mail-obstruction and mail-delay statutes, and a violation of California Civil Code section 52.1, the Tom Bane Civil Rights Act. The amended complaint named the United States as a defendant, as the court had instructed, but also continued to name Louis DeJoy and the Postal Service.

Administrative-exhaustion requirement

The Federal Tort Claims Act requires a claimant to first submit an administrative claim to the relevant federal agency before filing suit. The claim must include a specific amount of damages and enough written information to begin an investigation. The agency must then deny the claim or fail to act on it for six months. The court treated these requirements as jurisdictional, meaning that failure to satisfy them prevents the federal court from hearing the case.

The amended complaint alleged that Rogers’s girlfriend contacted the Postal Service about harassment, discrimination, racial slurs, and the altercation. It also alleged that the Postal Service acknowledged the complaint in writing and sent a letter to Rogers’s address. The court held that these allegations still did not establish that the girlfriend was authorized to submit a claim for Rogers, that a written claim containing a specific damages amount was filed, or that the agency denied the claim or failed to act on it for six months.

Ruling

Judge Haywood S. Gilliam, Jr. granted the defendants’ motion to dismiss without leave to amend. The court dismissed the case because Rogers had not adequately alleged exhaustion of administrative remedies and had already had an opportunity to amend. The Clerk was directed to enter judgment for the defendants and close the case. The court did not decide the defendants’ other arguments for dismissal. It also terminated the defendants’ motion for a continued stay as moot.