Opinion
Case No. 20-CV-1748 (DSD/HB)
01-26-2021
Lisa Warner, Plaintiff, v. Department of Human Services, Defendant.
REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION
Plaintiff Lisa Warner brought this action seeking to challenge the decision of the Minnesota Department of Human Services ("DHS") to terminate her assistance benefits. That decision of the DHS may be challenged judicially—but in state court, not federal court. See Minn. Stat. § 256.045, subd. 7. No federal question of law was apparent from the complaint, see 28 U.S.C. § 1331, and Warner did not allege that the parties were of diverse citizenship, see 28 U.S.C. § 1332. Accordingly, on September 10, 2020, this Court ordered plaintiff Lisa Warner to show cause why this matter should not be dismissed without prejudice for lack of jurisdiction. [See ECF No. 4.] Warner was at first given 30 days in which to submit her response (and referred to volunteer counsel for assistance in drafting that response). (Id.) Upon Warner's request, the deadline was later extended to December 1, 2020, and then once more extended until January 15, 2021. [See ECF Nos. 7, 9.]
That extended deadline has now passed, and Warner has not yet filed a substantive response to this Court's order to show cause. In fact, Warner has not communicated with the Court at all since her most recent motion for an extension to file a response was granted. This Court therefore concludes, consistent with its prior order [ECF No. 4] and the reasoning above, that it lacks subject-matter jurisdiction over this litigation. It is therefore recommended that this matter be summarily dismissed without prejudice. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 12(h)(3) ("If the court determines at any time that it lacks subject-matter jurisdiction, the court must dismiss the action.").
Based on the foregoing, and on all of the files, records, and proceedings herein, IT IS HEREBY RECOMMENDED THAT:
1. This matter be DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE for lack of jurisdiction.Dated: January 26, 2021
2. The application to proceed in forma pauperis of plaintiff Lisa Warner [ECF No. 2] be DENIED AS MOOT.
s/ Hildy Bowbeer
Hildy Bowbeer
United States Magistrate Judge
NOTICE
Filing Objections: This Report and Recommendation is not an order or judgment of the District Court and is therefore not appealable directly to the Eighth Circuit Court of Appeals. Under Local Rule 72.2(b)(1), "a party may file and serve specific written objections to a magistrate judge's proposed finding and recommendations within 14 days after being served a copy" of the Report and Recommendation. A party may respond to those objections within 14 days after being served a copy of the objections. See Local Rule 72.2(b)(2). All objections and responses must comply with the word or line limits set forth in Local Rule 72.2(c).