Amiri v. Gelman Management Company

Opinion

pt .’l ~.¢J

Clerk, ‘)‘ 1.

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT Courts *0: tt

FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA

ABDUL WAKIL AMIRI,

Plaintiff,

CivilAction N0.

v. GELMAN MANAGEMENT COMPANY, l

Defendant.

MEMORANDUM OPINION

This matter is before the Court on plaintiffs application to proceed in forma paup his pro se complaint. For the reasons stated below, the Court will grant the application ai

dismiss the complaint.

Plaintiff alleges that his former landlord, Gelman Management Company ("Gelm

~- r.- ?-fa" » _ e¢‘” f l 10 ?

¢s ict ~’. 5a é

erz`s and

id

ina')),

defamed him and discriminated against him by representing to the Superior Court of the District

of Columbia that he had not paid rent for several months, and by effecting his eviction in

Notwithstanding plaintiff’ s allegations of discrimination based on his nationality, plaintiff’ s

2009.

claims arise from the parties’ landlord-tenant relationship - claims which are properly brought in

the Superior Court.

Federal district courts have jurisdiction in civil actions arising under the Constitut laws or treaties of the United States. See 28 U.S.C. § 1331. ln addition, federal district c have jurisdiction over civil actions where the matter in controversy exceeds $75,000, and

is between citizens of different States. See 28 U.S.C. § l332(a). Plaintiff purports to brin

ion, ourts the suit

g a civil

rights claim against a private entity, and thus fails to present a federal question under 42 U.S.C. §

1983 because this provision applies only to "person[ s] who [act], under color of any statute,

ordinance, regulation, custom, or usage, of any State or Territory or the District of Columbia.’

Id. Because all the parties are in the District of Columbia, plaintiff fails to establish diversity jurisdiction.

Accordingly, the Court will dismiss the complaint for lack of subject matter

A…rt

Url/ited Stat`efs@istrict Judge

jurisdiction. An Order is issued separately.

DATE; il \?fl> il?,/