1:12-cv-01263 | D.D.C. | Jul 31, 2012
Case 1:12-cv-01263-UNA Document 3 Filed 07/31/12 Page 1 of 1
FILED JUL 3 1 2012
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
Clerk, U.S. District & Bankruptcy Courts for the Disti 1ct oi Columbia
Tyrone Julius, ) ) Plaintiff, ) ) 12 1263 v. ) Civil Action No. ) Veronica Arelis, ) ) Defendant. ) MEMORANDUM OPINION This matter is before the Court on plaintiffs pro se complaint and his application to proceed in forma pauperis. The Court will grant plaintiffs application and dismiss the complaint for lack of subject matter jurisdiction. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 12(h)(3) (requiring the court to dismiss an action "at any time" it determines that subject matter jurisdiction is wanting).
The subject matter jurisdiction of the federal district courts is limited and is set forth generally at 28 U.S.C. §§ 1331 and 1332. Under those statutes, federal jurisdiction is available only when a "federal question" is presented or the parties are of diverse citizenship and the amount in controversy exceeds $75,000. A party seeking relief in the district court must at least plead facts that bring the suit within the court's jurisdiction. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 8(a).
Plaintiff, a District of Columbia resident, sues an individual who either resides or works in the District of Columbia for $199 million in damages. The complaint, devoid of facts, presents neither a federal question nor a basis for diversity jurisdiction. A separate Order of dismissal accompanies this Memorandum Op ·
'fJ\J DATE: July Zfi_, 2012 N