Allen v. Wells Fargo

• Court: District Court, District of Columbia
• Decided: April 7, 2025
• Docket: Civil Action No. 2025-0276
• Status: Published

Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA

DERRICK ALLEN, SR., ) ) Plaintiff, ) ) v. ) Civil Action No. 25-00276 (UNA) ) ) WELLS FARGO et al., ) ) Defendants. )

MEMORANDUM OPINION

Plaintiff, appearing pro se, has filed a complaint and an application to proceed in forma

pauperis (IFP). For the following reasons, the Court grants the IFP application and dismisses the

complaint.

The subject-matter jurisdiction of the federal district courts is limited and is set forth

generally at 28 U.S.C. §§ 1331 and 1332. Under those statutes, federal jurisdiction is available

only when a “federal question” is presented, id. § 1331, or the parties are of diverse citizenship

and the amount in controversy “exceeds the sum or value of $75,000, exclusive of interest and

costs,” id. § 1332(a). A party seeking relief in the district court must at least plead facts that

bring the suit within the court’s jurisdiction. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 8(a). Failure to plead such facts

warrants dismissal of the action. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 12(h)(3).

Plaintiff sues a branch of Wells Fargo Bank in Durham, North Carolina, and three North

Carolina-based individuals, including former Governor Roy Cooper and Dr. Judith A. Fortney.

Compl., ECF No. 1 at 2-3. Plaintiff alleges that on January 3, 2025, “Wells Fargo refuse[d] to

re-open a checking account which establish connections with both Judith Fortney (checks

deposit), and my 2019 Dodge Challenger which was tooken [sic] in Washington, D.C. and illegally towed by ACE towing in Alexandria, VA[.]” Id. at 4 (parenthesis in original). Plaintiff

seeks, among other relief, “to be compensated . . . in the amount of 24 trillion and/or whatever

the Court deem[s] appropriate[.]” Id.

Although Plaintiff invokes 42 U.S.C. § 1983 and purports to sue the individuals in their

official and personal capacities, id. at 2-3, the facts alleged do not plausibly plead a claim under

“the Constitution [or] laws . . .of the United States,” 28 U.S.C. § 1331, or support any other basis

of federal court jurisdiction. Consequently, this case will be dismissed by separate order.

_________/s/____________ TANYA S. CHUTKAN Date: April 7, 2025 United States District Judge