Rahman v. Esseddiq

• Court: District Court, District of Columbia
• Decided: February 5, 2013
• Docket: Civil Action No. 2013-0159
• Status: Published

Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA FILED FEB- 5 20\3 Clerk U.S. District & Bankrupt~ Court~ 1or the District o1 Colum ta Reema Rahman, ) ) Plaintiff, ) ) v. ) Civil Action No. ) Basma Esseddiq, ) ) 18 0159 Defendant. ) )

MEMORANDUM OPINION

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 ofthe action. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 12(h)(3).

Plaintiff is a resident of Columbia, Maryland, suing a resident of the District of Columbia

for alleged unpaid loans. She demands $2, 150.00. The complaint does not present a federal

question and the amount in controversy is way below the minimum amount to bring this case

(N\ within the Court's diversity jurisdiction. 1 A separate Order of dismissal accompanies this

Memorandum Opinion.

DATE: January _21_, 2013

II

1 Plaintiffs recourse lies, if at all, in the District of Columbia courts. 2