Source: http://oh.findacase.com/research/wfrmDocViewer.aspx/xq/fac.20180404_0001313.SOH.htm/qx
Timestamp: 2019-04-24 09:51:59+00:00

Document:
GARY C. MOHR, et al., Defendants.
Plaintiff, Thomas Albert, an Ohio citizen who is proceeding without the assistance of counsel, brings this action under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 against Gary C. Mohr, Director of the Ohio Department of Rehabilitation and Corrections, and Andre Imbrogno, Chairperson of the Ohio Adult Parole Board (collectively “Defendants”), all of whom are Ohio citizens. Plaintiff's request to proceed in forma pauperis is GRANTED. All judicial officers who render services in this action shall do so as if the costs had been prepaid. 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a). This matter is before the United States Magistrate Judge for the initial screen of Plaintiff's Complaint and Amended Complaint under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2) to identify cognizable claims and to recommend dismissal of Plaintiff's Complaint, or any portion of it, which is frivolous, malicious, fails to state a claim upon which relief may be granted, or seeks monetary relief from a defendant who is immune from such relief. 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2). Having performed the initial screen, for the reasons that follow, it is RECOMMENDED that the Court DISMISS this Plaintiff's claims against Defendants for failure to assert any claim over which this Court has subject matter jurisdiction.
A federal court has limited subject matter jurisdiction. “The basic statutory grants of federal court subject-matter jurisdiction are contained in 28 U.S.C. § 1331, which provides for ‘[f]ederal-question' jurisdiction, and § 1332, which provides for ‘[d]iversity of citizenship' jurisdiction.” Arbaugh v. Y&H Corp., 546 U.S. 500, 501 (2006). Federal-question jurisdiction is invoked when a plaintiff pleads a claim “arising under” the federal laws, the Constitution, or treaties of the United States. Id. (citation omitted). For a federal court to have diversity jurisdiction pursuant to Section 1332(a), there must be complete diversity, which means that each plaintiff must be a citizen of a different state than each defendant, and the amount in controversy must exceed $75, 000. Caterpillar, Inc. v. Lewis, 519 U.S. 61, 68 (1996).

References: § 1983
 § 1915
 § 1915
 § 1915
 § 1331
 § 1332
 v. 
 v.