Opinion
Case: 1:16-cv-00465
03-03-2016
Michael Sheneman, Plaintiff, v. Judge Jon E. DeGuilio, Defendant.
Assigned To : Unassigned
Assign. Date : 3/8/2016
Description: Pro Se Gen. Civil (F Deck) MEMORANDUM OPINION
Plaintiff, proceeding pro se, has submitted a Complaint and an application to proceed in forma pauperis. The Court will grant the application and will dismiss this case for lack of subject matter jurisdiction. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 12(h)(3) (requiring dismissal of an action "at any time" the Court determines that it lacks subject matter jurisdiction).
Plaintiff is a federal prisoner at the Federal Correctional Institution in Lisbon, Ohio. He sues a federal judge in the Northern District of Indiana for decisions made about plaintiff's motion to vacate under 28 U.S.C. § 2255. Plaintiff seeks "a chance to prove our (my son) innocence." Compl. at 5.
This Court lacks jurisdiction to review the decisions of its sister courts. See United States v. Choi, 818 F. Supp. 2d 79, 85 (D.D.C. 2011) (district courts "generally lack[] appellate jurisdiction over other judicial bodies, and cannot exercise appellate mandamus over other courts.") (citing Lewis v. Green, 629 F. Supp. 546, 553 (D.D.C.1986)); Fleming v. United States, 847 F. Supp. 170, 172 (D.D.C. 1994), cert. denied 513 U.S. 1150 (1995) (noting that "[b]y filing a complaint in this Court against federal judges who have done nothing more than their duty . . . Fleming has instituted a meritless action") (applying District of Columbia Court of Appeals v. Feldman, 460 U.S. 462, 482 (1983); Rooker v. Fidelity Trust Co., 263 U.S. 413, 415, 416 (1923)). Hence, this case will be dismissed with prejudice. A separate Order accompanies this Memorandum Opinion. DATE: March 3rd , 2016
/s/_________
United States District Judge