Opinion
Civil Case 3:18-CV-2399-D
12-21-2018
VICTORIA ANDERSON, Plaintiff, v. VIOLET L. NOBLES, et al., Defendants.
ORDER
The United States Magistrate Judge made findings, conclusions, and a recommendation in this case. Plaintiff filed on December 6, 2018 an "original petition proper jurisdiction," which the court construes to be her objections. Following de novo review, the court concludes that the objections should be overruled and that the findings, conclusions, and recommendation of the United States Magistrate Judge should be adopted. It is apparent that plaintiff, probably because she is not a lawyer, has confused the concept of personal jurisdiction with subject matter jurisdiction. This court lacks subject matter jurisdiction in this case in which the parties are not completely diverse citizens and no federal question claim has been alleged.
It is therefore ordered that this action is summarily dismissed without prejudice for lack of subject matter jurisdiction. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 12(h)(3).
The court prospectively certifies that any appeal of this action would not be taken in good faith. See 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(3); Fed. R. App. P. 24(a)(3). In support, the court adopts and incorporates by reference the magistrate judge's findings, conclusions, and recommendation. See Baugh v. Taylor, 117 F.3d 197, 202 n.21 (5th Cir. 1997). Based on the findings, the court finds that any appeal of this action would present no legal point of arguable merit and would, therefore, be frivolous. Howard v. King, 707 F.2d 215, 220 (5th Cir. 1983). In the event of an appeal, plaintiff may challenge this certification by filing a separate motion to proceed in forma pauperis on appeal with the Clerk of the Court, U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit. See Baugh, 117 F.3d at 202; Fed. R. App. P. 24(a)(5).
SO ORDERED.
December 21, 2018.
/s/_________
SIDNEY A. FITZWATER
SENIOR JUDGE