(1988); see Esquire, Inc. v. Ringer, 192 U.S. App. D.C. 187, 591 F.2d 796, 806 n. 28 (D.C. Cir. 1978). Therefore, to state a claim for a Mandamus Act order in this case, the plaintiff must show that the DOJ or the FBI owe him a duty to reinvestigate his brother's death.
The plaintiff has not provided the Court with, and the Court is not aware of, any basis whatsoever to conclude that the DOJ, the FBI, or any other official or agency of the United States owes the plaintiff a nondiscretionary duty to investigate his brother's 1942 death almost half a century later. Therefore, the Court concludes that the plaintiff has failed to state a claim for which a Mandamus Act order may be granted, and that this claim must be dismissed.
See Baker v. Director, United States Parole Comm'n, 286 U.S. App. D.C. 310, 916 F.2d 725, 727 (D.C. Cir. 1990) (where it is patently obvious that a plaintiff cannot prevail on the facts alleged in his complaint, sua sponte dismissal for failure to state a claim is appropriate).
For the foregoing reasons, the Court holds that defendants FBI and DOJ are entitled to summary judgment as a matter of law on the plaintiff's FOIA and Privacy Act withholding-of-records claims, because neither of these agencies has failed to comply with the requirements of those acts. Moreover, the Court concludes that it lacks subject matter jurisdiction to adjudicate the plaintiff's FOIA and Privacy Act claims against any of the individually named defendants, as well as his Privacy Act failure-to-amend-records claim against all of the defendants, and must therefore dismiss those claims. Finally, because the plaintiff has not stated a claim for which the extraordinary remedy of mandamus may be granted, his request for an order compelling the DOJ, the FBI, and the heads of those agencies to conduct an investigation into his brother's death must be dismissed.
The Court will issue an Order of even date herewith in accordance with the foregoing opinion.
ORDER - January 31, 1991, Filed
In accordance with the Court's Opinion of even date herewith, it is, by the Court, this 31 day of January, 1991,
ORDERED that the defendants' motion for summary judgment on the plaintiff's FOIA and Privacy Act claims against defendants Federal Bureau of Investigation and United States Department of Justice shall be, and hereby is, GRANTED; and it is
FURTHER ORDERED that the defendants' motion to dismiss the plaintiff's Freedom of Information Act ("FOIA") and Privacy Act claims against the individual defendants Sessions, Thornburgh, and Moschella and the plaintiff's Privacy Act failure-to-amend-records claim against all defendants shall be, and hereby is, GRANTED; and it is
FURTHER ORDERED that the plaintiff's request for an order of the Court pursuant to the Mandamus and Venue Act shall be, and hereby is, DISMISSED; and it is
FURTHER ORDERED that the above-captioned case shall be, and hereby is, DISMISSED from the Court's docket.