Академический Документы
Профессиональный Документы
Культура Документы
Page: 1 of 6
Case: 15-15440
Page: 2 of 6
Case: 15-15440
Page: 3 of 6
Under Bonner v. City of Prichard, 661 F.2d 1206, 1209 (11th Cir.1981) (en banc), this
Court is bound by cases decided by the former Fifth Circuit before October 1, 1981.
3
Case: 15-15440
Page: 4 of 6
Case: 15-15440
Page: 5 of 6
Case: 15-15440
Page: 6 of 6
U.S.C. 1332(a). To establish federal question jurisdiction, a plaintiffs wellpleaded complaint [must] raise[] issues of federal law. Metro. Life Ins. Co. v.
Taylor, 481 U.S. 58, 63, 107 S. Ct. 1542, 1546 (1987); see also 28 U.S.C. 1331.
A well-pleaded complaint presents a federal question where it establishes either
that federal law creates the cause of action or that the plaintiffs right to relief
necessarily depends on resolution of a substantial question of federal law. Smith
v. GTE Corp., 236 F.3d 1292, 1310 (11th Cir. 2001) (quotation omitted).
The district court did not err by finding that it lacked subject matter
jurisdiction. On this record, it is clear that diversity jurisdiction is lacking because
Muhammad and several of the defendants are citizens of the same state.
Furthermore, due to the deficiencies in Muhammads complaint, federal question
jurisdiction is also lacking. Although Muhammad mentioned a number of federallaw claims, his complaint is not well-pleaded because he failed to assert
adequate facts on which to base his claims. See Metro. Life Ins. Co., 481 U.S. at
63, 107 S. Ct. at 1546. Muhammad failed to meet his burden of showing that the
district court had subject matter jurisdiction, and therefore the district court
correctly dismissed the action.
AFFIRMED.