Cohen v. Syme
This text of 120 F. App'x 746 (Cohen v. Syme) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Opinion
MEMORANDUM
Leslie Charles Cohen appeals pro se the district court’s dismissal of his action for lack of subject matter jurisdiction. We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1291. We review de novo the district court’s ruling on jurisdiction, Nike, Inc. v. Comercial Iberica De Exclusivas Deportivas, S.A., et. al, 20 F.3d 987, 990 (9th Cir.1994), and we affirm.
The federal court is presumed to lack subject matter jurisdiction in a particular case unless the contrary affirmatively appears. See A-Z Int'l v. Phillips, 323 F.3d 1141, 1145 (9th Cir.2003) (citations omitted). To establish diversity jurisdiction, Cohen was required to demonstrate that he was neither a United States citizen nor a lawful permanent resident. See 28 U.S.C. § 1332. Cohen’s complaint failed to do so.
AFFIRMED.
This disposition is not appropriate for publication and may not be cited to or by the courts of this circuit except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
120 F. App'x 746, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/cohen-v-syme-ca9-2005.