CHASE v. MERSON et al

Filing 102

PROCEDURAL ORDER re 83 MOTION to Dismiss filed by DON PATCH. By JUDGE D. BROCK HORNBY. (jib)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
DISTRICT OF MAINE
JOHN F. CHASE,
PLAINTIFF
V.

ARTHUR MERSON,

ET AL.,

DEFENDANTS

)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)

CIVIL NO. 2:18-CV-165-DBH

PROCEDURAL ORDER
Federal subject matter jurisdiction in this case is based upon two RICO
counts.

The defendant Donald B. Patch, who is named in one of the RICO

counts, has moved to dismiss the entire case for lack of subject matter
jurisdiction (ECF No. 83), and the issue has been fully briefed by Patch and the
plaintiff. Of the other defendants who have not been defaulted some, but not all,
have raised a subject matter jurisdiction defense in their Answers but have not
yet argued it. (Raised or not, subject matter jurisdiction is not waivable.)
My ruling on the pending motion will affect these other parties. If I grant
the motion, the case will probably exit federal court (it seems unlikely that the
supplemental state claims would proceed without the federal hook). But if I deny
it, that ruling will also affect the entire case, and I do not expect to entertain later
arguments from these other defendants to raise it again.
I conclude therefore that the best course is to allow the other nondefaulted defendants the opportunity to raise any subject matter jurisdiction
issues now. They shall do so by legal memoranda filed by April 15, 2019. The

plaintiff shall file any additional response by April 29, 2019. There is no need
for further replies given the briefing that has already occurred.
SO ORDERED.
DATED THIS 2ND DAY OF APRIL, 2019
/S/D. BROCK HORNBY
D. BROCK HORNBY
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

2