Document ID: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-ca10-15-03144/USCOURTS-ca10-15-03144-0/pdf.json

Parties Involved:
American Cab Co.
Appellee
Jessica Freeman
Appellee
Othman A. Rahab
Appellant

Document Text:

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS 

FOR THE TENTH CIRCUIT 

_________________________________ 

OTHMAN A. RAHAB, a/k/a Othel Gray, 

Jr., 

 Plaintiff - Appellant, 

v. 

JESSICA FREEMAN; AMERICAN CAB 

CO., 

 Defendants - Appellees. 

No. 15-3144 

(D.C. No. 6:15-CV-01138-MLB-KMH) 

(D. Kan.) 

_________________________________ 

ORDER AND JUDGMENT*

_________________________________ 

Before HARTZ, TYMKOVICH, and MORITZ, Circuit Judges. 

_________________________________ 

Othman Rahab appeals the district court’s sua sponte dismissal of his pro se 

complaint for lack of subject-matter jurisdiction. See 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2) (providing 

screening procedures for sua sponte dismissal of meritless actions brought in forma 

pauperis);1

 Fed. R. Civ. P. 12(h)(3) (requiring the court to dismiss an action if “at any 

time” it determines it lacks subject-matter jurisdiction). 

 *

 After examining the briefs and appellate record, this panel has determined 

unanimously that oral argument would not materially assist in the determination of 

this appeal. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2); 10th Cir. R. 34.1(G). The case is therefore 

ordered submitted without oral argument. This order is not binding precedent except 

under the doctrines of law of the case, res judicata, and collateral estoppel. It may be 

cited, however, for its persuasive value. See Fed. R. App. P. 32.1; 10th Cir. R. 32.1. 

1

 Although Jones proceeded in forma pauperis below, he has paid his filing fee 

in full for this appeal. 

FILED 

United States Court of Appeals

Tenth Circuit 

August 12, 2015

Elisabeth A. Shumaker 

Clerk of Court

Appellate Case: 15-3144 Document: 01019474421 Date Filed: 08/12/2015 Page: 1 
2 

Rahab sued Jessica Freeman and American Cab Company in federal district court 

alleging that Freeman failed to stop at a red light and crashed into the American Cab taxi 

in which Rahab was a passenger, seriously injuring him. We review de novo the district 

court’s decision dismissing Rahab’s suit for lack of subject-matter jurisdiction. Radil v. 

Sanborn W. Camps, Inc., 384 F.3d 1220, 1224 (10th Cir. 2004). 

As the party invoking federal jurisdiction, Rahab bears the burden of establishing 

jurisdiction. Id. He has not met this burden. Construed liberally, Rahab’s complaint 

seems to allege only state-law personal injury claims against Freeman and American Cab. 

Such claims do not establish federal-question jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1331—they 

do not “aris[e] under the Constitution, laws, or treaties of the United States.” Nor does 

Rahab allege diversity jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1332—his original complaint 

alleged that all parties were citizens of Kansas and his amended complaint said nothing 

about the parties’ citizenship. We therefore affirm the district court’s dismissal of 

Rahab’s complaint for lack of subject-matter jurisdiction. 

Entered for the Court 

Nancy L. Moritz 

Circuit Judge 

Appellate Case: 15-3144 Document: 01019474421 Date Filed: 08/12/2015 Page: 2