Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-azd-4_05-cv-00485/USCOURTS-azd-4_05-cv-00485-0/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 290
Nature of Suit: Other Real Property Actions
Cause of Action: 28:1331 Fed. Question

---

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

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

DISTRICT OF ARIZONA

Sammye A. Richardson,

Plaintiff,

v. 

Caswell Bell and Hillison, et al.,

Defendants. ______________________________________

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

CV 05-485 TUC DCB

ORDER

A review of Plaintiff's complaint fails to reveal any basis for this Court's

jurisdiction. Plaintiff's claim is not based on any federal statute, nor does it raise any

federal question. See, 28 U.S.C. § 1331. Furthermore, while Plaintiff's complaint does

seek damages in excess of $100,000.00, which would satisfy the amount in controversy

requirements of 28 U.S.C. § 1332(b), there is not complete diversity of citizenship upon

which to base jurisdiction. See, 28 U.S.C. § 1332(a). Plaintiff is an Arizona resident, as is

at least one of the named Defendants, thereby rendering diversity incomplete. See,

Wisconsin Department of Corrections v. Schacht, 524 U.S. 381, 388 (1998) ("A case falls

within the federal district court's 'original' diversity 'jurisdiction' only if diversity is

complete, i.e., only if there is no plaintiff and no defendant who are citizens of the same

state"). In short, Plaintiff's complaint fails to set forth a basis for this Court's subject

matter jurisdiction.

Accordingly,

IT IS ORDERED that Plaintiff's complaint is DISMISSED without prejudice.

Plaintiff shall have thirty (30) days from the filing date of this Order to file an amended

complaint, clearly and concisely stating the claims for relief, and properly establishing

Case 4:05-cv-00485-DCB Document 26 Filed 10/28/05 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

this Court's subject matter jurisdiction. See, Rule 8(a), Fed.R.Civ.P. The amended

complaint must be retyped or rewritten in its entirety on a Court-approved form and may

not incorporate any part of the original complaint by reference. Any amended complaint

submitted by Plaintiff should be clearly designated as an amended complaint on the face

of the document. Plaintiff should take notice that if she fails to timely file an amended

complaint, the complaint and this action will be dismissed with prejudice, without

further notice to Plaintiff. Rule 41(b), Fed.R.Civ.P.

Additionally, Plaintiff is reminded that as a non-attorney, she is prohibited from

representing the interests of any party or entity other than herself. See, Johns v. County of

San Diego, 114 F.3d 874, 876 (9th Cir. 1997). Therefore, to the extent Plaintiff seeks to

represent the interests of Rock of Gibraltor, or anyone else, she may not do so.

DATED this 25th day of October, 2005.

Case 4:05-cv-00485-DCB Document 26 Filed 10/28/05 Page 2 of 2