Clark v. Board of Trustees of the University of Illinois

Filing 6

MEMORANDUM Opinion and Order Signed by the Honorable Milton I. Shadur on 12/28/2010:Mailed notice(srn, )

Clark v. Board of Trustees of the University of Illinois

Doc. 6

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS EASTERN DIVISION ALFONZO CLARK, Plaintiff, v. BOARD OF TRUSTEES OF THE UNIVERSITY OF ILLINOIS, Defendants. ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) )

No. 10 C 8170

MEMORANDUM OPINION & ORDER Alfonzo Clark ("Clark") has sought to invoke Lanham Act §43(a) (15 U.S.C. §1125(a)) as the predicate for imposing liability on the Board of Trustees of the University of Illinois for the asserted mislabeling of a university course taken by Clark (then a student at the University of Illinois at Chicago). Because this Court's initial responsibility in dealing with any case assigned to its calendar is to address the existence or nonexistence of federal subject matter jurisdiction (Wis. Knife Works v. Nat'l Metal Crafters, 781 F.2d 1280, 1282 (7th Cir. 1986)) and, indeed, to do so sua sponte (Wernsing v. Thompson, 423 F.3d 732, 743 (7th Cir. 2005)), this opinion turns to that subject. On that score the answer is clear: under Lanham Act §43(a). Clark lacks standing

That has been reconfirmed as recently

as three months ago in Stayart v. Yahoo!Inc., 623 F.3rd 436, 438 (7th Cir. 2010), citing several earlier cases that had so held. Accordingly both the Complaint and this action are dismissed for

Dockets.Justia.com

lack of subject matter jurisdiction.1

______________________________ Milton I. Shadur Senior United States District Judge Dated: December 28, 2010

This ruling both (1) obviates any need to consider whether Clark's claim also has any substantive deficiencies and (2) moots Clark's In Forma Pauperis Application. 2

1