Jordan v. Chevrolet Customer Assistance Center

Filing 10

ORDER ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS 7 . IT IS ORDERED that Jordans Complaint be and hereby is DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE for lack of subject- atter jurisdiction and/or improper venue. Signed by Judge Susie Morgan.(bwn)

Download PDF
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF LOUISIANA STANLEY JORDAN, SR., Plaintiff CIVIL ACTION VERSUS NO. 15-3463 CHEVROLET CUSTOMER ASSISTANCE CENTER, Defendant SECTION: “E” (3) ORDER On August 13, 2015, Plaintiff Stanley Jordan filed the present action in this Court against Defendant, the Chevrolet Customer Assistance Center. 1 In sum, Jordan sues the Chevrolet Customer Assistance Center for problems he has allegedly experienced with a number of his vehicles. Because the Court has an obligation, at all stages of the litigation, to examine the basis upon which federal subject matter jurisdiction rests, Magistrate Judge Knowles issued a Report and Recommendations examining whether the Court has subject matter jurisdiction over Jordan’s Complaint. 2 Judge Knowles concluded, on November 3, 2015, that “there is no basis for federal jurisdiction in this proceeding.” 3 Jordan was ordered to submit any objections he may have to the Report and Recommendations by November 17, 2015. Petitioner then filed two documents: (1) a motion for leave to file an amended complaint; 4 and (2) an Objection to the Report and Recommendations. 5 The Court has reviewed both the motion for leave and the objection filed by Jordan, and has treated both documents as objections to the Report and Recommendations issued R. Docs. 1, 6. Jordan’s Complaint was initially marked deficient for failure to pay the filing fee and/or submit an in forma pauperis application. R. Doc. 2. Jordan subsequently remedied the deficiencies. 2 See generally R. Doc. 7. 3 R. Doc. 7 at 3. 4 R. Doc. 8. 5 R. Doc. 9. 1 1 by Judge Knowles. After reviewing Jordan’s pleadings and the arguments stated therein, the Court concludes that Jordan has altogether failed to identify a proper basis for federal subject matter jurisdiction over his Complaint. For that reason, the Court hereby approves the Magistrate Judge’s Report and Recommendations and adopts it as its opinion. Accordingly; IT IS ORDERED that Jordan’s Complaint be and hereby is DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE for lack of subject-matter jurisdiction and/or improper venue. New Orleans, Louisiana, this 17th day of November, 2015. _______________________ ________ SUSIE MORGAN UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE 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?