Dim Njaka v. Michael D. Kennedy, No. 14-3515 (8th Cir. 2015)
Annotate this CaseCourt Description: Per Curiam - Before Wollman, Bye and Gruender, Circuit Judges] Civil case - Federal Retirement Systems Act. Dismissal affirmed without comment.
Download PDF
United States Court of Appeals For the Eighth Circuit ___________________________ No. 14-3515 ___________________________ Dim Njaka lllllllllllllllllllll Plaintiff - Appellant v. Michael D. Kennedy; Pamela-Jeanne Moran; Dana K. Bilyeu; Thomas K. Emswiler; Ronald D. McCray; David A. Jones; Terrence A. Duffy; Megan J. Brennan;1 Gregory T. Long; Thomas E. Perez,2 Secretary of Labor; Sharon Malmborg lllllllllllllllllllll Defendants - Appellees ____________ Appeal from United States District Court for the District of Minnesota - Minneapolis ____________ Submitted: October 30, 2015 Filed: November 4, 2015 [Unpublished] ____________ Before WOLLMAN, BYE, and GRUENDER, Circuit Judges. ____________ 1 Megan J. Brennan has been appointed to serve as Postmaster General, and is substituted as appellee pursuant to Federal Rule of Appellate Procedure 43(c). 2 Thomas E. Perez has been appointed to serve as Secretary of Department of Labor, and is substituted as appellee pursuant to Federal Rule of Appellate Procedure 43(c). PER CURIAM. Dim Njaka appeals the district court’s3 order granting defendants’ motion to dismiss his lawsuit under the Federal Employees’ Retirement System Act. Upon de novo review, see Hopkins v. City of Bloomington, 774 F.3d 490, 491-92 (8th Cir. 2014), we agree with the district court that dismissal was proper. We deny as moot his challenge to the denial of his motion for a preliminary injunction. The judgment of the district court is affirmed.4 See 8th Cir. R. 47B. ______________________________ 3 The Honorable John R. Tunheim, Chief Judge, United States District Court for the District of Minnesota, adopting the report and recommendations of the Honorable Jeanne J. Graham, United States Magistrate Judge for the District of Minnesota, now retired. 4 We decline to address the new matters and evidence Njaka offers on appeal. See Stone v. Harry, 364 F.3d 912, 914 (8th Cir. 2004). -2-
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
