D.P. MARSHALL JR., UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE.
ORDER
D.P. MARSHALL JR., UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE.
Hollis alleges that he was part of a "non-consensual experiment" while he was in the Air Force. Doc. 1 at 3. He says he suffered psychological hazing, mind distortions, extreme sleep deprivation, extreme experimental regimes, and abnormal communications. He brings an intentional infliction of emotional distress claim against the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency and the Air Force Research Lab, seeking $150 million from each defendant and an injunction terminating his contract with them. The defendants move to dismiss Hollis's claim for lack of subject matter jurisdiction.
Hollis's claim is barred by sovereign immunity. The only proper defendant under the Federal Tort Claims Act is the United States. Duncan v. Department of Labor, 313 F.3d 445, 447 (8th Cir. 2002) (per curiam). Hollis didn't sue the United States in this case. And the FTC A doesn't waive sovereign immunity for federal agencies. Federal Deposit Insurance Corp. v. Meyer, 510 U.S. 471, 475-79 (1994). Hollis's claim would fail even if he had sued the United States. He says that all his injuries occurred as part of his military service. Under the Feres doctrine, claims related to military service remain barred by sovereign immunity. Feres v. United States, 340 U.S. 135 (1950). That Hollis was inactive status does not change the legal analysis. Hollis's claim will therefore be dismissed without prejudice for lack of subject matter jurisdiction. * * *
Motion to dismiss, Doc. 15, granted. Judgment will issue.
So Ordered.