Opinion
Civil Action 2:09-CV-505.
June 23, 2009
ORDER and REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION
Plaintiff, who is proceeding without the assistance of counsel, seeks leave to proceed in a civil action without prepayment of fees or costs. Doc. No. 1. That motion is GRANTED. All judicial officers who render services in this action shall do so as if the costs had been prepaid. However, having performed the initial screen of the Complaint required by 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e), the Court concludes that the action must be dismissed for lack of jurisdiction and for failure to state a claim for relief.
The Complaint names as defendants a Columbus, Ohio, business, two agencies of the State of Ohio and the Social Security Administration. Complaint. Although the Complaint purports to invoke this Court's jurisdiction over claims arising under federal law, it is difficult to decipher the actual claims asserted by plaintiff. It appears that plaintiff wishes to pursue a worker's compensation claim against the defendant business, but does not wish to pursue Ohio's workers compensation procedures because of alleged misconduct on the part of the defendant state agencies. The Complaint seeks "3% interest on 1 billion given out annually for 20 years compounded annually . . ." as well as additional monetary damages. The Complaint contains no allegation regarding the defendant Social Security Administration.
The Complaint fails to state a claim arising under federal law, or any claim whatsoever against the Social Security Administration. Moreover, the Eleventh Amendment to the United States Constitution divests this Court of jurisdiction over civil rights claims for monetary damages asserted against agencies of the State of Ohio. See Edelman v. Jordan, 415 U.S. 651 (1974). Finally, because plaintiff and the defendant business appear to be residents of the State of Ohio, this Court lacks diversity jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1332.
It is therefore RECOMMENDED that this action be DISMISSED.
If any party seeks review by the District Judge of this Report and Recommendation, that party may, within ten (10) days, file and serve on all parties objections to the Report and Recommendation, specifically designating this Report and Recommendation, and the part thereof in question, as well as the basis for objection thereto. 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1); F.R. Civ. P. 72(b). Response to objections must be filed within ten (10) days after being served with a copy thereof. F.R. Civ. P. 72(b).
The parties are specifically advised that failure to object to the Report and Recommendation will result in a waiver of the right to de novo review by the District Judge and of the right to appeal the decision of the District Court adopting the Report and Recommendation. See Thomas v. Arn, 474 U.S. 140 (1985); Smith v. Detroit Federation of Teachers, Local 231 etc., 829 F.2d 1370 (6th Cir. 1987); United States v. Walters, 638 F.2d 947 (6th Cir. 1981).