*1

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA

MEMORANDUM OPINION

Plaintiff, proceeding pro se, has submitted a Complaint and an application to proceed in forma pauperis. The Court will grant the application and will dismiss this case for lack of subject matter jurisdiction. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 12(h)(3) (requiring dismissal of an action "at any time" the Court determines that it lacks subject matter jurisdiction).

Plaintiff is a federal prisoner incarcerated in Yazoo, Mississippi. He sues the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit and a U.S. magistrate judge in the Northern District of Florida, claiming error in their decisions with regard to an arrest warrant. Plaintiff wants this Court, among other relief, "to remove the illegal arrest warrant." Compl. at 6. But as a general rule applicable here, this federal district court lacks jurisdiction to review the decisions of other courts. See United States v. Choi, 818 F. Supp. 2d 79, 85 (D.D.C. 2011) (district courts "generally lack[] appellate jurisdiction over other judicial bodies, and cannot exercise appellate mandamus over other courts.") (citing Lewis v. Green, 629 F. Supp. 546, 553 (D.D.C.1986)); Fleming v. United States, 847 F. Supp. 170, 172 (D.D.C. 1994), cert. denied 513 U.S. 1150 (1995) (noting that "[b]y filing a complaint in this Court against . . . judges who have done

*2 nothing more than their duty . . . Fleming has instituted a meritless action") (applying District of Columbia Court of Appeals v. Feldman, 460 U.S. 462, 482 (1983); Rooker v. Fidelity Trust Co., 263 U.S. 413, 415, 416 (1923)); see also Panko v. Rodak, 606 F.2d 168, 171 n. 6 (7th Cir. 1979), cert. denied, 444 U.S. 1081 (1980) ("It seems axiomatic that a lower court may not order the judges or officers of a higher court to take an action."). Therefore, this case will be dismissed. A separate Order accompanies this Memorandum Opinion.

Date: Februar 2017

United States District Judge