Liu, Wenfang v. Soehner, Russell

Filing 9

Transmission of Notice of Appeal, Order, Judgment and Docket Sheet to Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals re 7 Notice of Appeal. (Attachments: # 1 Order, # 2 Judgment, # 3 Docket Sheet) (nln),(ps)

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF WISCONSIN
LIU WENFANG ,
Plaintiff,

OPINION and ORDER

v.

Case No. 15-cv-385-wmc

RUSSELL SYLVAN SOEHNER, II,
Defendant.

Plaintiff Liu WenFang has filed a proposed civil complaint against Russell Sylvan
Soehner II. Liu alleges that Soehner sexually assaulted her on September 8, 2014, and later
sought an injunction against her based on false accusations. In her complaint, Liu alleges
claims against Soehner for (1) malicious and false accusations and (2) sexual assault.
Because Liu is proceeding without prepayment of the filing fee, the court is required
to screen the complaint under 28 U.S.C. § 1915 to determine whether she may proceed with
the case. Because she is a pro se litigant, Liu is held to a “less stringent standard” in crafting
pleadings. Haines v. Kerner, 404 U.S. 519, 520 (1972). Even giving Liu every benefit under
this relaxed pleading standard, however, the basic alleged facts establish that this court
plainly lacks subject matter jurisdiction and must dismiss her lawsuit.
A federal court is one of limited jurisdiction. Generally, this court may only consider
cases: (1) that arise under federal law, 28 U.S.C. § 1331; or (2) in which the parties in suit
are citizens of different states and the amount in controversy is greater than $75,000, 28
U.S.C. § 1332. The court does not have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1331, as Liu has
identified no federal claims in her complaint. Nor can this court discern one from the facts
alleged. For example, Liu does not allege that Soehner is a governmental actor, so she cannot

1

bring claims against him under the United States Constitution; nor do her claims implicate
any federal statute. Although Liu alleges that Soehner perpetrated terrible acts against her,
any claims she may have against him arise under state law.
Similarly, while a federal court can generally resolve state law claims if there is
jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1332, the court does not have jurisdiction over this case under
§ 1332, because Liu and Soehner both reside in Wisconsin. Liu lives in Verona, and she
alleges that Soehner lives in Madison.
Because this court lacks subject matter jurisdiction over Liu’s claims, her complaint
must be dismissed. If Liu wishes to pursue her claims, she must do so in state court. 1

ORDER
IT IS ORDERED that plaintiff Liu WenFang’s complaint is DISMISSED for lack of
subject matter jurisdiction. The clerk of court is directed to close this case.

Entered this 8th day of July, 2015.
BY THE COURT:
/s/
________________________________________
WILLIAM M. CONLEY
District Judge

The court notes that in addition to monetary relief, Liu seeks in this lawsuit that Soehner
be imprisoned. That is relief only a public law enforcement agency could seek. The materials
attached to the complaint by Liu appear to indicate that local law enforcement investigated
Liu’s sexual assault allegations and declined to seek prosecution of Soehner. Regardless,
imprisonment is not a remedy that Liu can obtain on her own in a civil lawsuit, be it state or
federal.
1

2