WILDER v. BOLINGER

Filing 3

ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE - Mr. Wilder shall have through December 17, 2021 to file an amended complaint or otherwise show cause why this case should not be dismissed for lack of subject-matter jurisdiction (SEE ORDER FOR ADDITIONAL INFORMATION). Signed by Judge James Patrick Hanlon on 11/17/2021. Copy to Plaintiff via US Mail. (DWH)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF INDIANA
INDIANAPOLIS DIVISION
GREGORY WILDER,

)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)

Plaintiff,
v.
GEORGIANNA BOLINGER,
Defendant.

No. 1:21-cv-02853-JPH-MJD

SHOW CAUSE ORDER
Mr. Wilder's complaint alleges that Defendant committed trespass by
theft of property against him. Dkt. 1. The complaint requests a jury trial but
does not identify the damages Mr. Wilder seeks. Id. The complaint also fails to
identify the basis for this Court's jurisdiction.
Federal courts are courts of limited jurisdiction. In order to hear and
rule on the merits of a case, a federal court must have subject-matter
jurisdiction over the issues. Bender v. Williamsport Area Sch. Dist., 475 U.S.
534, 541 (1986). If the Court determines at any time that it lacks subjectmatter jurisdiction, it must dismiss the case. Fed. R. Civ. P. 12(h)(3); see
Evergreen Square of Cudahy v. Wis. Hous. & Econ. Dev. Auth., 776 F.3d 463,
465 (7th Cir. 2015) (“[F]ederal courts are obligated to inquire into the existence
of jurisdiction sua sponte.”).
The Court does not appear to have jurisdiction over Mr. Wilder’s claims.
The Supreme Court has explained the two basic ways to establish subjectmatter jurisdiction:
1

The basic statutory grants of federal-court subjectmatter jurisdiction are contained in 28 U.S.C. §§ 1331
and 1332. Section 1331 provides for federal-question
jurisdiction, § 1332 for diversity of citizenship
jurisdiction. A plaintiff properly invokes § 1331
jurisdiction when she pleads a colorable claim arising
under the Constitution or laws of the United States.
She invokes § 1332 jurisdiction when she presents a
claim between parties of diverse citizenship that
exceeds the required jurisdictional amount, currently
$75,000.
Arbaugh v. Y&H Corp., 546 U.S. 500, 513 (2006) (citations and quotation
omitted).
Mr. Wilder's complaint contains no jurisdictional allegations regarding
either federal-question or diversity jurisdiction. Accordingly, the Court cannot
exercise jurisdiction under either 28 U.S.C § 1331 or 1332.
Mr. Wilder shall have through December 17, 2021 to file an amended
complaint or otherwise show cause why this case should not be dismissed for
lack of subject-matter jurisdiction. In doing so, he must clearly show (1) the
federal law giving rise to his claims, (2) that the parties are of diverse
citizenship, or (3) another basis for the Court’s jurisdiction. If Mr. Wilder does
not respond, the Court will dismiss this case without prejudice for lack of
subject-matter jurisdiction.
SO ORDERED.
Date: 11/17/2021

2

Distribution:
GREGORY WILDER
513 W. First St.
Marion, IN 46952

3