Michael Bauermeister v. Kor Xiong

Filing

PER CURIAM OPINION FILED - THE COURT: DIANA E. MURPHY, MORRIS S. ARNOLD and DUANE BENTON (UNPUBLISHED) [3831181] [11-2485]

Download PDF
United States Court of Appeals FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT ___________ No. 11-2485 ___________ Michael Bauermeister, Appellant, v. Kor Xiong, President of Hmong Satellite TV, Inc., Appellee. * * * * Appeal from the United States * District Court for the * District of Nebraska. * * [UNPUBLISHED] * * ___________ Submitted: September 16, 2011 Filed: September 21, 2011 ___________ Before MURPHY, ARNOLD, and BENTON, Circuit Judges. ___________ PER CURIAM. Michael Bauermeister appeals the district court’s1 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B) dismissal of his complaint, in which he requested that criminal charges be brought against the defendant. Upon careful review, we conclude that the dismissal was proper. See United States v. Batchelder, 442 U.S. 114, 124 (1979) (“[w]hether to prosecute and what charges to file or bring before a grand jury are decisions that generally rest in the prosecutor’s discretion”); cf. Koll v. Wayzata State Bank, 1 The Honorable Laurie Smith Camp, United States District Judge for the District of Nebraska. Appellate Case: 11-2485 Page: 1 Date Filed: 09/21/2011 Entry ID: 3831181 397 F.2d 124, 127 (8th Cir. 1968) (affirming dismissal where plaintiff failed to plead intelligible grounds for federal jurisdiction; basis for federal jurisdiction must affirmatively appear clearly and distinctly). We further conclude that, to the extent Mr. Bauermeister has attempted to advance a new claim on appeal, that claim is not properly before this court. See Stone v. Harry, 364 F. 3d 912, 914 (8th Cir. 2001) (stating general rule that claims not presented in district court may not be advanced for first time on appeal). Accordingly, we affirm. See 8th Cir. R. 47B. ______________________________ -2- Appellate Case: 11-2485 Page: 2 Date Filed: 09/21/2011 Entry ID: 3831181

Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.


Why Is My Information Online?