Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-azd-2_11-cv-00733/USCOURTS-azd-2_11-cv-00733-0/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 140
Nature of Suit: Negotiable Instruments
Cause of Action: 09:1 U.S. Arbitration Act

---

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

WO

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE DISTRICT OF ARIZONA

Ted King, 

Plaintiff, 

vs.

LVN Motors, Inc.; Van Tuyl Group, Inc.,

Defendants. 

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

No. CV 11-733-PHX-JAT

ORDER

Pending before the Court is Plaintiff’s application to proceed in forma pauperis.

However, before the Court considers that motion, the Court will consider whether it has

jurisdiction over this case. See Belleville Catering Co. v. Champaign Market Place, L.L.C.,

350 F.3d 691, 693 (7th Cir. 2003). 

Federal courts are courts of limited jurisdiction; thus, they can hear only those cases

that the Constitution and Congress have authorized them to adjudicate: namely, cases

involving diversity of citizenship, a federal question, or cases to which the United States is

a party. Kokkonen v. Guardian Life Ins. Co. of Am., 511 U.S. 375, 377 (1994). The party

asserting jurisdiction bears the burden of proving a jurisdictional basis exists. Id.

In this case, Plaintiff states that jurisdiction is based on the Federal Arbitration Act

(9 U.S.C. § 2) (“FAA”). Doc. 1 at 2. However, the FAA does not create a basis for Federal

subject matter jurisdiction by itself, or as a Federal question. See Carter v. Health Net of

Calif., Inc., 374 F.3d 830, 834 (9th Cir. 2004) (“It is well-established that even when a

Case 2:11-cv-00733-JAT Document 10 Filed 05/04/11 Page 1 of 2
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

- 2 -

petition is brought under the Federal Arbitration Act (FAA), a petitioner seeking to confirm

or vacate an arbitration award in federal court must establish an independent basis for federal

jurisdiction. Southland Corp. v. Keating, 465 U.S. 1, 15 n. 9 (1984) (noting that ‘while the

Federal Arbitration Act creates federal substantive law requiring the parties to honor

arbitration agreements, it does not create any independent federal-question jurisdiction.’)”).

Because the FAA cannot be the basis for jurisdiction in this case,

IT IS ORDERED that by May 25, 2011, Plaintiff shall file an amended complaint

alleging a basis for federal subject matter jurisdiction, or this case will be dismissed, without

prejudice.

DATED this 4th day of May, 2011.

Case 2:11-cv-00733-JAT Document 10 Filed 05/04/11 Page 2 of 2