METTS et al v. USA
Order denying, as moot, 4 Motion for Leave to Proceed in forma pauperis; and directing the clerk to enter judgment dismissing the complaint for lack of subject matter jurisdiction and for failure to state a claim upon which relief can be granted. Signed by Senior Judge Robert H. Hodges, Jr. (dls) (Plaintiff served via certified mail; Article No. 7017 1450 0000 1346 0386) Service on parties made.
@nftp! 9ltutts @turt of /r[erst @lsims
No. 17-1984 C
Filed: January 12,2018
CASSANDRA D. METTS et al..
U.S. COURT OF
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
ORDER DISMISSING COMPLAINT
Plaintiffs submitted a complaint pro se containing various criminal allegations,
including property damage and mail theft. They have applied to proceed in forma
pauperis. None of plaintiffs' allegations fall within the jurisdiction of this court; we must
dismiss their Complaint without further action by the parties.
Plaintiffs ask that we fine orjail an individual whom they allege has been guilty of
criminal actions for "constant mail stealing and damaging of property." They cite two
criminal statutes from the state of Maryland for supportThe primary jurisdictional statute in the United States Court of Federal Claims is
the Tucker Act,28 U.S.C. $ la9l(a)(l). That statute generally limits our jurisdiction to
suits against the United States for money presently due. Monetary relief may be granted
only if such relief is expressly authorized by a separate statute or contract. United States
v. Testan,424 U.5.392,400 (1976). We know of no statute or other legislative provision
affording monetary relief for plaintiffs' alleged violations of state criminal laws.
In addition, plaintiffs allege a violation of their First Amendment constitutional
rights. With respect to this claim, the Complaint fails pursuant to Rule 12(b)(6) of this
court. The Tucker Act grants this court jurisdiction to "render judgment upon any claim
against the United States founded . . . upon the Constitution." However, this statute
merely provides a jurisdictional basis to proceed in this court. Testan, 424 U.S. at 400.
We know of no statute or other provision affording monetary relief for plaintiffs' claimed
violation of the Constitution. and olaintiffs have cited none.
70r? 1,q50 00EE l,3qb
The Clerk of Court will DISMISS plaintiffs' Complaint for lack of subject matter
jurisdiction and for failure to state a claim upon which relief can be granted. Plaintiffs'
request to proc eed informa pauperis is moot and therefore DENIED.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
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?