Frye v. Shuckra

Filing 4

Memorandumn of Opinion and Order. This action is dismissed for the reasons set forth herein. The Court certifies, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(3), that an appeal from this decision could not be taken in good faith. Judge Christopher A. Boyko on 7/7/2014. (H,CM)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
NORTHERN DISTRICT OF OHIO

MATTHEW FRYE, JR.,
Plaintiff,
v.
CHRISTOPHER SHUCKRA,
Defendant.

)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)

CASE NO. 1:14 CV 309
JUDGE CHRISTOPHER A. BOYKO
MEMORANDUM OF OPINION
AND ORDER

On February 13, 2014, Plaintiff pro se Matthew Frye, Jr. filed this action against Defendant
Christopher Shuckra. Plaintiff, a federal inmate at the United States Penitentiary in Adelanto,
California, alleges that Defendant - a Connecticut resident - did not perform any services after
Plaintiff paid him $350 to assist in filing a lawsuit.
Although pro se pleadings are liberally construed, Boag v. MacDougall, 454 U.S. 364, 365,
(1982) (per curiam); Haines v. Kerner, 404 U.S. 519, 520 (1972), a "district court may, at any
time, sua sponte dismiss a complaint for lack of subject matter jurisdiction pursuant to Rule
12(b)(1) of the Federal Rules of Civil procedure when the allegations of a complaint are totally
implausible, attenuated, unsubstantial, frivolous, devoid of merit or no longer open to discussion."
Apple v. Glenn, 183 F.3d 477, 479 (6th Cir.1999).
As an initial matter, this Court is not a proper venue for this action, as none of the events
alleged in the Complaint occurred here and neither party is located in this District. See, 28 U.S.C
§ 1391(b). Further, there would be no point in transferring the case to a court where venue would

otherwise be proper, because Plaintiff does not set forth a claim over which any federal court
might have jurisdiction. That is, he does not invoke a federal statute in support of his claim, and
any claim he seeks to assert based on diversity of citizenship falls well short of the $75,000.00
jurisdictional required under 28 U.S.C § 1332(a).
Accordingly, this action is dismissed . The Court certifies, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(3),
that an appeal from this decision could not be taken in good faith.
IT IS SO ORDERED.

s/ Christopher A. Boyko
CHRISTOPHER A. BOYKO
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
DATED: July 7, 2014

-2-