Opinion
CIVIL ACTION NO. 10-1244 (MLC).
March 12, 2010
OPINION
THE PLAINTIFF, who is pro se, applies for in-forma-pauperis relief under 28 U.S.C. § 1915 ("Application"). (Dkt. entry no. 1, Application.) The Court, based upon the assertions in support thereof, will (1) grant the Application, and (2) direct the Clerk of the Court to file the Complaint. The Court may now (1) review the purported Complaint, and (2) dismiss it sua sponte if it is frivolous or malicious, fails to state a claim on which relief may be granted, or seeks monetary relief against a defendant who is immune from such relief, see 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B).
THE COMPLAINT is handwritten and mostly unintelligible. (Dkt. entry no. 1, Compl.) It appears that the plaintiff is in some sort of dispute with an inspector. The plaintiff does not (1) assert or demonstrate that the Court has jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § ("Section") 1332, or (2) assert a cause of action or a statute that would fall under the Court's jurisdiction pursuant to Section 1331. See Fed.R.Civ.P. 8, 10. THE COURT will dismiss the Complaint for being frivolous and failing to state a claim on which relief may be granted. The Court would be inclined to grant the plaintiff leave to reinstate his claims in state court to the extent that they assert causes of action under state law, but the Court is unable to determine the nature of the plaintiff's purported claims. See 28 U.S.C. § 1367(d) (concerning state law claims surviving dismissal of federal claims); see Jaworowski v. Ciasulli, 490 F.3d 331, 333-36 (3d Cir. 2007) (concerning state law claims surviving dismissal when court finds lack of jurisdiction under Section 1332). The Court will issue an appropriate Order and Judgment.