Fraction v. James et al

Filing 11

MEMORANDUM AND ORDER that this case is dismissed without prejudice. A separate judgment will be entered in accordance with this order. Ordered by Judge John M. Gerrard. (Copy mailed to pro se party) (KMG)

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF NEBRASKA
BERNARD FRACTION,
Plaintiff,
v.
RANDY JAMES, and VANDELAY
INVESTMENTS, et al.,
Defendants.

)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)

8:14CV348

MEMORANDUM
AND ORDER

This matter is before the court on its own motion. On February 3, 2015, the
court conducted an initial review of Plaintiff’s Complaint. (Filing No. 7.) The court
determined it could not ascertain from the face of the Complaint whether subjectmatter jurisdiction is proper in this forum. The court gave Plaintiff 30 days in which
to file an amended complaint that set forth the grounds for this court’s jurisdiction.
(Filing No. 7 at CM/ECF p. 4.)
Plaintiff filed a letter and several documents on March 10, 2015. (See Filing
No. 10.) However, Plaintiff did not set forth the basis for this court’s jurisdiction in
his letter; nor is the basis for this court’s jurisdiction apparent based on any pleadings
or documents filed in this case. For this reason, and for the reasons set forth in the
court’s order dated February 3, 2015, this case will be dismissed.
IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that:
1.

This case is dismissed without prejudice.

2.

A separate judgment will be entered in accordance with this order.

DATED this 17th day of April, 2015.
BY THE COURT:
s/ John M. Gerrard
United States District Judge

*This opinion may contain hyperlinks to other documents or Web sites. The U.S. District Court for the District
of Nebraska does not endorse, recommend, approve, or guarantee any third parties or the services or products they
provide on their Web sites. Likewise, the court has no agreements with any of these third parties or their Web sites. The
court accepts no responsibility for the availability or functionality of any hyperlink. Thus, the fact that a hyperlink ceases
to work or directs the user to some other site does not affect the opinion of the court.

2