Spencer v. Obamas

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
PRINCESS MARIA SPENCER, )
)
Plaintiff, )
)
v. ) Civil Action No. 22-3817 (UNA)
)
)
THE OBAMAS, )
)
Defendants. )
MEMORANDUM OPINION
This matter, filed pro se, is before the Court on its initial review of Plaintiff’s complaint,
ECF No. 1, and application for leave to proceed in forma pauperis, ECF No. 2. The Court will
grant the application and dismiss the complaint for lack of subject matter jurisdiction.
The subject matter jurisdiction of the federal district courts is limited and is set forth
generally at 28 U.S.C. §§ 1331 and 1332. Under those statutes, federal jurisdiction is available
only when a “federal question” is presented or the parties are of diverse citizenship and the amount
in controversy exceeds $75,000. A party seeking relief in the district court must at least plead facts
that bring the suit within the court’s jurisdiction. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 8(a). Failure to plead such
facts warrants dismissal of the action. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 12(h)(3).
Plaintiff, a resident of Washington, D.C., has sued “The Obamas” at an address in Chicago,
Illinois. In the one-sentence complaint, Plaintiff states that she is “filing this case to claim funds
that were obtained through civil cases that were filed on my behalf.” That conclusory statement
does not establish federal court jurisdiction, and “federal courts are without power to entertain
claims” that “are so attenuated and unsubstantial as to be absolutely devoid of merit, wholly
1
insubstantial, [or] obviously frivolous[.]” Hagans v. Lavine, 415 U.S. 528, 536–37 (1974)
(internal quotation marks and citations omitted). So, this action will be dismissed by separate
order.
_________/s/_____________
AMY BERMAN JACKSON
Date: December 29, 2022 United States District Judge
2