Bosma v. ARVCO Container Corporation

CourtDistrict Court, E.D. Michigan
DecidedJuly 30, 2019
Docket2:19-cv-12136
StatusUnknown

This text of Bosma v. ARVCO Container Corporation (Bosma v. ARVCO Container Corporation) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering District Court, E.D. Michigan primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Bosma v. ARVCO Container Corporation, (E.D. Mich. 2019).

Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN SOUTHERN DIVISION

JEFFREY SCOTT BOSMA,

Plaintiff, Case No. 19-12136 v. HON. GEORGE CARAM STEEH ARVCO CONTAINER CORP.,

Defendant. ______________________________/

ORDER GRANTING PLAINTIFF IN FORMA PAUPERIS STATUS AND DISMISSING CASE FOR LACK OF SUBJECT MATTER JURISDICTION

Plaintiff Jeffrey Scott Bosma, proceeding pro se, has filed his second federal lawsuit arising out of an alleged workplace injury taking place on March 1, 2011. Plaintiff has sued Defendant Arvco Container Corporation, the place where Plaintiff was assigned to work when he was employed by Snelling Staffing Services. Based upon the financial information in the Application to Proceed Without Prepaying Fees or Costs, the court grants plaintiff in forma pauperis status pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915. However, the court dismisses Plaintiff’s complaint pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(h)(3) for lack of subject-matter jurisdiction. The issue of subject-matter jurisdiction may be raised at any time, including sua sponte by the court. In re Lewis, 398 F.3d 735, 739 (6th Cir. 2005).Plaintiff claims federal question jurisdiction exists based on alleged violations of the

Occupational Safety and Health Act (OSHA). But the Sixth Circuit has held that “OSHA does not create a private right of action.” Ellis v. Chase Commc'ns, Inc., 63 F.3d 473, 477 (6th Cir. 1995). Accordingly,

IT IS ORDERED that the above-captioned matter is dismissed without prejudice for lack of subject matter jurisdiction. Based on the preceding order, this court certifies that any appeal from this decision would be frivolous, not in good faith and, therefore,

pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(3), may not be taken in forma pauperis. IT IS SO ORDERED. Dated: July 30, 2019

s/George Caram Steeh GEORGE CARAM STEEH UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

Copies of this Order were served upon attorneys of record on July 30, 2019, by electronic and ordinary mail and also on Jeffrey Scott Bosma, 2161 Chevy Chase Drive, Davison, MI 48423.

s/Barbara Radke Deputy Clerk

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
Bosma v. ARVCO Container Corporation, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/bosma-v-arvco-container-corporation-mied-2019.