Wilborn v. Tuten et al

Filing 27

MEMORANDUM OPINION. Signed by Judge Virginia Emerson Hopkins on 5/22/2017. (JLC)

FILED
2017 May-22 AM 11:45
U.S. DISTRICT COURT
N.D. OF ALABAMA

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ALABAMA
MIDDLE DIVISION
DON MITCHELL WILBORN,
Pro Se Plaintiff,
v.
ROBERT B. TUTEN, et al,
Defendants.

)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)

Civil Action No.:
4:16-CV-106-VEH

MEMORANDUM OPINION
The record reflects that, on August 5, 2016, the magistrate notified the Plaintiff
that the face of his Complaint was insufficient to meet his burden to establish federal
question or diversity jurisdiction. (Doc. 16). The magistrate gave the Plaintiff thirty
(30) days to show cause why his Complaint should not be dismissed for lack of
subject matter jurisdiction. (Id. at 3). The plaintiff filed a First Amended Complaint
on August 17, 2016. (Doc. 17). That document is now the operative complaint. On
September 2, 2016, the Plaintiff filed a response to the Order to Show Cause. (Doc.
19). Thereafter, he filed three untimely responses. (Docs. 20, 21, and 22). On May
9, 2017, in an extensive order, the magistrate demonstrated that this Court lacks
subject matter jurisdiction over this action and determined that it was due to be
dismissed without prejudice. (Doc. 23). Thereafter, the case was reassigned to the
undersigned.

The Court has reviewed the entire file in this case, de novo, and agrees with the
magistrate that the Plaintiff has failed to establish that this Court has subject
jurisdiction over this matter. The magistrate’s Order of May 9, 2017, is ADOPTED
as the opinion of this Court. By separate order, this matter will be DISMISSED
without prejudice.
DONE this 22nd day of May, 2017.

VIRGINIA EMERSON HOPKINS
United States District Judge

2