Fort Belknap v. Office of Pub. & Indian Hous.

For the court to have jurisdiction for review under 25 U.S.C. § 4161(d), a party must have either alleged a violation of § 4161(a), or pursued one of the remedies specifically identified in § 4161(a)(1).

The Fort Belknap Housing Department was part of a federal rent-subsidy program administered by the Department of Housing and Urban Development ("HUD") for entities that lease housing to Indians. The program provided money to Fort Belknap on a per-unit basis. The amount provided to Ft. Belknap was calculated from information self-reported by Ft. Belknap. In 2010, HUD sent Fort Belknap a letter explaining that Fort Belnkap had received overpayment in the amount of $2,858,786.00 between the years 2000 and 2010. HUD further explained that it would rover the amount of overpayment. Fort Belknap filed an administrative appeal to HUD's Deputy Assistant Secretary on the grounds that HUD's plan for reduction exceed the maximum allowed in 24 C.F.R. § 1000.340(b), and that it was not timely with respect to 24 C.F.R. § 1000.319(d). HUD denied the appeal. Fort Belknap then filed a petition with the Ninth Circuit for review, arguing the court had jurisdiction under 25 U.S.C. §4161(d). The Ninth Circuit held that since there was no violation of § 4161(a) alleged by HUD, and since HUD did not take any action in imposing the remedies listed in § 4161(a)(1), the court did not have jurisdiction to review the merits of the case under § 4161(d). DISMISSED.