ROY v. SEARS
Filing
6
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER, ORDERED that the amended complaint filed on 7/8/2014 shall be, and is hereby, DISMISSED without prejudice, etc. Signed by Judge Noel L. Hillman on 11/17/2014. (dmr)(n.m.)
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
DISTRICT OF NEW JERSEY
_________________________________
FRANK ROY,
Plaintiff,
Civil No. 14-2848 (NLH/KMW)
v.
MEMORANDUM OPINION
AND ORDER
SEARS,
Defendant.
__________________________________
APPEARANCES:
Frank Roy
998 W. Landis Ave, Unit 121
Vineland, New Jersey 08360
Pro Se Plaintiff
HILLMAN, District Judge
This matter having come before the Court by way of
Plaintiff’s application to proceed in forma pauperis and by way
of Plaintiff’s complaint submitted on May 5, 2014 alleging a
violation of 42 U.S.C. § 1983; and
The Court, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915, having previously
reviewed the complaint to determine whether any claim is
frivolous, malicious, fails to state a claim on which relief may
be granted, or seeks monetary relief from a defendant who is
immune from such relief; and
1
The Court having found that Plaintiff’s complaint, even
construed liberally, did not allege facts sufficient to
demonstrate that Plaintiff can maintain a plausible claim for
relief under 42 U.S.C. § 1983; and
The Court specifically having found that Plaintiff failed
to adequately allege facts to demonstrate that Defendant Sears
was acting under color of state law, or how Defendant’s alleged
conduct violated Plaintiff’s constitutionally protected rights
(Mem. Op. and Order 8, June 16, 2014 [Doc. No. 3]); and
The Court having dismissed Plaintiff’s complaint without
prejudice and having granted Plaintiff leave to file an amended
complaint which sets forth sufficient facts demonstrating that
Plaintiff has a plausible claim for relief (Id. at 10); and
Plaintiff having filed an amended complaint [Doc. No. 4] on
July 8, 2014; and
The Court noting that federal courts have an independent
obligation to address issues of subject matter jurisdiction sua
sponte and may do so at any stage of the litigation, see
Adamczewski v. Emerson Elec. Co., No. 10-4862, 2011 WL 1045162,
at *1 (D.N.J. Mar. 22, 2011) (citing Meritcare Inc. v. St. Paul
Mercury Ins. Co., 166 F.3d 214, 217 (3d Cir. 1999), overruled on
other grounds by Exxon Mobil Corp. v. Allapattah Svcs., Inc.,
545 U.S. 546, 125 S. Ct. 2611, 162 L. Ed. 2d 502 (2005)); see
also Zambelli Fireworks Mfg. Co. v. Wood, 592 F.3d 412, 418 (3d
2
Cir. 2010) (“Federal courts are courts of limited jurisdiction,
and when there is a question as to our authority to hear a
dispute, ‘it is incumbent upon the courts to resolve such
doubts, one way or the other, before proceeding to a disposition
on the merits.’”) (citing Carlsberg Res. Corp. v. Cambria Sav. &
Loan Ass’n, 554 F.2d 1254, 1256 (3d Cir. 1977)); and
The Court noting that in the amended complaint, Plaintiff
removes any reference to 42 U.S.C. § 1983, and instead asserts
diversity of citizenship as a basis for jurisdiction pursuant to
28 U.S.C. § 1332; and
The Court also noting that 28 U.S.C. § 1332(a) provides
that the Court has original jurisdiction over all civil actions
where the matter in controversy exceeds $75,000, exclusive of
interest and costs, and is between citizens of different States;
and
The Court further noting that in the amended complaint,
Plaintiff avers that he is a citizen of the State of New Jersey
and that Defendant is also a citizen of the State of New Jersey;
and
The Court finding that because Plaintiff alleges in the
amended complaint that both he and Defendant are citizens of the
State of New Jersey, there is not complete diversity of the
parties and the Court therefore lacks subject matter
jurisdiction over this action pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1332; and
3
The Court also finding that the amended complaint fails to
assert a federal question for the Court to exercise subject
matter jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1331.
THEREFORE, it is on this
17th
day of
November
, 2014,
ORDERED that the amended complaint filed on July 8, 2014
shall be, and is hereby, DISMISSED without prejudice; and it is
further
ORDERED that the Clerk of the Court shall close the file in
this matter.
s/Noel L. Hillman
NOEL L. HILLMAN, U.S.D.J.
At Camden, New Jersey
4
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?