Beckodro v. Southeast Tire & Services

Filing 9

ORDER ADOPTING 5 Report and Recommendations. This case is dismissed and stands closed. Signed by District Judge J. Randal Hall on 7/8/2024. (pts)

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF GEORGIA
STATESBORO DIVISION

CYRILLE KOUAMBO BECKODRO,
Plaintiff,
CV 624-021

SOUTHEAST TIRE & SERVICES,
Defendant.

ORDER

After a careful, de novo review of the file, the Court concurs with the Magistrate

Judge's Report and Recommendation, to which no objections have been filed. In lieu of
objections. Plaintiff has submitted two amended complaints. (Doc. nos. 7, 8.)

The

Magistrate Judge recommended dismissing the case without prejudice because Plaintiff

failed to timely submit an amended complaint providing sufficient evidence of federal

jurisdiction. (See doc. no. 5.) As originally filed, and as explained in the order dated May
15, 2024,(doc. no. 4), the complaint provided no factual detail to support Plaintiffs "check
the box" assertion that jurisdiction was based on a federal question and diversity of

citizenship, as the statement of claim merely detailed a contractual dispute for car repairs in
the amount of $1,500.00. (See doc. no. 1, pp. 3-4.)
When the deadline for submitting the amended complaint expired without a response
from Plaintiff, the Magistrate Judge recommended dismissal of the case. (See doc. no. 5.)

Nearly one week later, the Clerk of Court received Plaintiffs first amended complaint, along
with a letter and documentation explaining unforeseen delay caused by the United States
Postal Service caused the untimely response to the Court's order directing Plaintiff to amend

his complaint. (See doc. no. 7.) Five days later, the Clerk of Court received and filed a
second amended complaint, bearing the same signature date as the first amendment. (See
doc. no. 8.) Given the documentation regarding delays in mail delivery, the Court finds no
reason to dismiss the case based on a failure to respond to a Court order.
However, upon consideration of the amended complaints, the Court finds the case is

due to be dismissed for the additional reason identified in the Magistrate Judge's

recommendation regarding lack of subject matter jurisdiction. (See doc. no. 5, pp. 2-3.)
Plaintiff again checked the boxes for both federal question and diversity of citizenship as the

basis for federal court jurisdiction.• (Doc. no. 8, p. 3.) When asked to list the specific
federal statutes upon which jurisdiction is based. Plaintiff states, "[Fjederal laws such as the

Magnuson-Moss Warranty Act and the Consumer Protection Safety Act provide avenues for

addressing deceptive practices in automotive repairs, allowing foreign citizens to seek relief
in federal court." (Id. (emphasis added).) Notably, however, the statement of claim never

mentions any provisions of the cited statutes, let alone identifies an avenue for relief by
connecting any fact alleged to a legal claim. As to diversity of citizenship pursuant to 28
U.S.C. § 1332(a), Plaintiff has not plausibly alleged the amount in controversy exceeds

$75,000. The copy of the invoice attached to the amended complaint lists a "Current

'The six pages of the form complaint are the same for each amendment, and both
pleadings have a signature date of May 24, 2024. (Doc. no. 7, p. 6; doc. no. 8, p. 6.) Because
the Clerk of Court attached Plaintiffs letter of explanation and Postal Service documentation to
the first amendment that is not relevant to the jurisdictional analysis, and for ease of reference,
the Court cites to the second amended complaint docketed on June 18, 2024,(doc. no. 8).

Estimate" of $1,599.41 and a balance due of nearly $1,120.00. (Doc. no. 8, p. 10.) "A
plaintiff satisfies the amount in controversy requirement by claiming a sufficient sum in good
faith," and the Court finds Plaintiffs "check the box" assertion that the controversy is for

more than $75,000, in the absence of any factual detail beyond an approximately $1,600.00
car repair bill, is not made in good faith.

Federated Mut. Ins. Co. v. McKinnon Motors,

LLC. 329 F.3d 805,807(11th Cir. 2003).

In sum, Plaintiff did not file an amended complaint providing sufficient factual detail
to establish jurisdiction to proceed in federal court. Accordingly, the Court ADOPTS the

Report and Recommendation of the Magistrate Judge, as modified herein, as its opinion,
DISMISSES this case for lack of subject matter jurisdiction, and CLOSES this civil action.
SO ORDERED this

day of July, 2024, at Augusta, Georgia.

HONORAEMO^ RANDAL HALL
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

SOUTHERN! DISTRICT OF GEORGIA