Wilson v. HSBC Bank USA National Association et al

Filing 4

ORDER re 1 Complaint; directing pro se plaintiff to file an amended complaint no later than 6/5/2015; denying request for temporary restraining order. Signed by Judge Timothy J. Corrigan on 5/21/2015.(SRW)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
MIDDLE DISTRICT OF FLORIDA
JACKSONVILLE DIVISION

LEIGHTON F. WILSON,
Plaintiff,
vs.

Case No. 3:15-cv-630-J-32PDB

HSBC BANK USA NATIONAL ASSOCIATION,
AS TRUSTEE FOR LEHMAN MORTGAGE TRUST
MORTGAGE PASS-THROUGH CERTIFICATES,
SERIES 2006-6, OCWEN LOAN SERVICING LLC,
AND TO ALL PERSONS UNKNOWN CLAIMING
ANY LEGAL OR EQUITABLE RIGHT, TITLE,
ESTATE, ANY LIEN OR INTEREST IN THE
SUBJECT PROPERTY,
Defendants.

ORDER
Upon review of this new case, it appears pro se plaintiff has not alleged any basis
upon which this federal court could exercise jurisdiction. Federal courts are courts of limited
jurisdiction and, generally, unless a party’s case presents a federal question (meaning that
the plaintiff is bringing suit alleging a violation of a Constitutional right or pursuant to a
particular federal statute or law which provides a private right of action) or the case falls
under the Court’s diversity jurisdiction (which generally occurs when all the defendants are
from different states than the plaintiff and the amount in controversy exceeds $75,0000),
then the federal court cannot rule on the case and it must be dismissed. See 28 U.S.C. §§
1331, 1332. Here, it appears plaintiff is a citizen of Florida and he is suing at least two
defendants who are also alleged to be citizens of Florida over matters involving property law.

Thus, it does not appear that plaintiff has raised any claims that would fall within this Court’s
limited jurisdiction and that, instead, his claims likely belong in state court.
However, because plaintiff is proceeding pro se, the Court will give him an opportunity
to amend his complaint to demonstrate that federal jurisdiction is proper. If he cannot do so,
the Court will dismiss the case for lack of subject matter jurisdiction.1 Accordingly, it is
hereby
ORDERED:
No later than June 6, 2015, plaintiff may file an amended complaint which
demonstrates jurisdiction is proper here. If he does not file an amended complaint by that
deadline, or if the amended complaint does not demonstrate an adequate basis of
jurisdiction, the case will be dismissed without further notice.
DONE AND ORDERED at Jacksonville, Florida this 21st day of May, 2015.

s.
Copies:
pro se plaintiff

1

Because the Court’s jurisdiction is doubtful (and in addition to several other reasons),
plaintiff is not entitled to the temporary restraining order requested in his complaint. That
request for relief is therefore denied.
2