Bell-Boston v. Jw Marriott Hotel

• Court: District Court, District of Columbia
• Decided: February 24, 2010
• Docket: Civil Action No. 2010-0285
• Status: Published

Opinion

FILED

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA 2 h 2010 Kare@mah Beli-Bosr<>n, ) c\erk, u.s. oistricf and ) Bankrupf€¥ C°“"t-°' Plaintiff, ) l _ v. ) civil Acrion No. 0285 ) JW Marriott Hotel, ) ) Defendant. ) MEMORANDUM OPlNION

This matter is before the Court on plaintiffs pro se complaint and application to proceed in forma pauperis The Court will grant plaintiffs application and dismiss the complaint for lack of subject matter jurisdiction.

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 or the parties are of diverse citizenship and the amount in controversy exceeds $75,000. 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. l2(h)(3).

Plaintiff, who lists her mailing address as a Landover Hills, Maryland, residence, sues JW Marriott Hotel in the District of Columbia for allegedly barring her from the premises on February l4, 2009. The complaint neither presents a federal question nor provides a basis for diversity jurisdiction because no amount in controversy is pleaded. Accordingly, the complaint

will be dismissed. A separate Order accompanies this Memorandum Opinion.

/~é¢.».,/}i¢.,...,.a, §

Dare¢ February /7 ,2010 united sr:Aj/Disrri¢wudg'e'