Cobbs v. Wong et al
Filing
7
MEMORANDUM ORDER. Signed by the Honorable Milton I. Shadur on 3/9/2017. Mailed notice. (eg,)
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS
EASTERN DIVISION
CALVIN RAY COBBS, SR.,
Plaintiff,
v.
PABLO CHUN YU WONG, etc., et al.,
Defendant.
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
Case No. 17 C 1702
MEMORANDUM ORDER
Calvin Ray Cobbs, Sr. ("Cobbs"), reflecting a mistaken belief that is unfortunately held
by many pro se plaintiffs unfamiliar with the federal court system, has just sought to come to this
District Court through the use of three Clerk's-Office-supplied forms: a "Complaint Under the
Civil Rights Act, Title 42 Section 1983," an In Forma Pauperis Application ("Application") and a
Motion for Attorney Representation ("Motion"). Because Cobbs' Complaint clearly does not
come within the subject matter jurisdiction of this District Court as circumscribed by Congress,
this memorandum order is issued sua sponte to dismiss both Cobbs' Complaint and this action for
lack of such jurisdiction -- a dismissal that is without prejudice to the possibility that Cobbs may
have some claim that can be entertained by a state court of competent jurisdiction. 1
Although Cobbs' contentions are difficult to follow, they plainly reflect a private dispute
with the several defendants whom he targets in his Complaint, and his claims also lack the total
diversity of citizenship required to invoke that branch of federal subject matter jurisdiction.
Accordingly:
_________________________
1
This Court expresses no view on that subject, so that the dismissal order here is without
prejudice to Cobbs' possible ability to enlist the aid of a state court for his claim or claims.
1.
As indicated earlier, both the Complaint and this action are dismissed, but
without prejudice as explained in n.1.
2.
Both the Application and the Motion are denied as moot.
__________________________________________
Milton I. Shadur
Senior United States District Judge
Date: March 9, 2017
-2-
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?