Case Name: Justo E. ROQUE, Jr., Plaintiff-Appellant v. DEPARTMENT OF CHILDREN AND FAMILY SERVICES STATE OF LOUISIANA; Sussy Sonnier, Secretary; Louisiana Division of Administrative law; Ann Wise, Director, Defendants-Appellees
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2016-05-17
Citations: 648 F. App'x 446
Docket Number: No. 15-30985
Parties: Justo E. ROQUE, Jr., Plaintiff-Appellant v. DEPARTMENT OF CHILDREN AND FAMILY SERVICES STATE OF LOUISIANA; Sussy Sonnier, Secretary; Louisiana Division of Administrative law; Ann Wise, Director, Defendants-Appellees.
Judges: Before JOLLY, DENNIS, and PRADO, Circuit Judges.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 648
Pages: 446–447

Head Matter:
Justo E. ROQUE, Jr., Plaintiff-Appellant v. DEPARTMENT OF CHILDREN AND FAMILY SERVICES STATE OF LOUISIANA; Sussy Sonnier, Secretary; Louisiana Division of Administrative law; Ann Wise, Director, Defendants-Appellees.
No. 15-30985
Summary Calendar.
United States Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit.
May 17, 2016.
Justo E. Roque, Jr., New Orleans, LA, pro se.
Celia Marie Williams-Alexander, Esq., Deputy General Counsel, Charles Leopold Dirks, III, Department of Children & Family Services, Baton Rouge, LA, for Defendants-Appellees.
Before JOLLY, DENNIS, and PRADO, Circuit Judges.

Opinion:
PER CURIAM:
Justo E. Roque, Jr., pro se, filed a complaint against the Louisiana Department of Children and Family Services, the Louisiana Division of Administrative Law, Sussy Sonnier, and Ann Wise. Liberally construed, the complaint appears to challenge adverse state benefit determinations. The district court dismissed the complaint for lack of subject matter jurisdiction, pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b)(1). The court observed that Roque had failed to assert any jurisdictional basis for his claims and that he had not suggested what federal laws the defendants allegedly violated, but instead incomprehensibly referenced past actions adjudicated in Louisiana administrative agencies and state courts.
Roque's arguments on appeal are just as incomprehensible as the allegations in his complaint. He has failed to satisfy his burden of identifying any basis for subject matter jurisdiction over his claims in federal court. The district court did not err in dismissing the complaint and its judgment is therefore
AFFIRMED.
Pursuant to 5th Cir. R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5th Cir. R. 47.5.4.
. The appellant's motion for oral argument is denied.