as of this morn....

AI----I could not locate any verified federal court docket or publicly filed complaint document accessible through reputable court-docket portals that clearly shows a civil lawsuit filed by Jake Lang naming Christopher Wray and seeking ~$25 million, with a case number, filing date, or certificate of service.

a nothing burger?

the intent and personal involvement hurdles are enormous.

Anyone can file a complaint in federal court, but judges immediately ask:

Did the plaintiff state a plausible claim under law?

Did they show specific facts tying the defendant to the alleged conduct?

Did the defendant act personally or just as part of institutional policy?

If those aren’t there, the case is dismissed — often before discovery even starts.

Wray personally violated a clearly established constitutional right?

Any reasonable official in his position would have known it was unlawful.

That’s almost impossible unless there’s hard evidence directly linking him to something blatantly illegal.

Otherwise, the court says: “Even if the agency made mistakes, that doesn’t make the Director personally liable.”  “Ordering infiltration” or “approving torture”

Those allegations require specific intent and direct authorization — not just “it happened under his leadership.”

Unless a plaintiff can produce a memo, recording, or testimony showing Wray gave explicit illegal orders, it won’t clear the threshold.

Without that, it looks like a political grievance, not a legally actionable claim.

So yes — from a legal standpoint, unless there’s provable intent and direct personal involvement, this kind of lawsuit is functionally DOA (a nothing burger).

interesting