Brainerd v. Sawyer

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT
No. 02-40348
Conference Calendar
ADRON P. BRAINERD,
Plaintiff-Appellant,
versus
JOE J. SAWYER,
Defendant-Appellee.
--------------------
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Southern District of Texas
USDC No. C-01-CV-532
--------------------
October 29, 2002
Before DeMOSS, BENAVIDES, and STEWART, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM:*
Adron P. Brainerd has appealed the district court’s judgment
dismissing his complaint for failing to satisfy the amount-in-
controversy requirement of 28 U.S.C. § 1332. A district court
may dismiss an action sua sponte for lack of subject-matter
jurisdiction. See FED. R. CIV. P. 12(h)(3). The district
court’s order of dismissal is reviewed de novo. Musslewhite v.
State Bar of Texas, 32 F.3d 942, 945 (5th Cir. 1994).
*
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this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except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.
No. 02-40348
-2-
Brainerd does not dispute the district court’s conclusion
that the amount in controversy does not exceed $75,000. Instead,
he complains that the district court did not permit him to amend
his complaint to cure the defect in his jurisdictional
allegations. Brainerd attempted to file an amended complaint
after the district court entered its judgment, but Brainerd’s
pleadings were ordered unfiled as they were not in compliance
with the local rules. Brainerd did not attempt in the district
court to cure the defects in his pleadings and does not explain
on appeal why the district court abused its discretion by
striking the pleadings. See Clark v. Tarrant County, 798 F.2d
736, 747 (5th Cir. 1986) (standard of review). Moreover,
Brainerd does not suggest in his brief what facts could have been
alleged to show that the amount in controversy exceeded $75,000.
The appeal is frivolous and must be
DISMISSED.