United States District Court, E.D. Michigan, Southern Division
ORDER GRANTING PLAINTIFF’S MOTION TO PROCEED IFP AND DISMISSING COMPLAINT
John Corbett O'Meara United States District Judge.
Plaintiff William Sanders filed a pro se complaint and application to proceed without prepayment of fees April 21, 2015. Upon reviewing the application, the court finds that Sanders is unable to pay the fees associated with the filing of his complaint. Therefore, the court will grant the application.
Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B), the court, however, must dismiss Sanders’ complaint, as the court lacks federal subject matter jurisdiction over the matter. “[I]t is well established that federal courts are courts of limited jurisdiction, possessing only that power authorized by the Constitution and statute.” Hudson v. Coleman, 347 F.3d 138, 141 (6th Cir. 2003). “A court lacking jurisdiction cannot render judgment but must dismiss the cause at any state of the proceedings in which it becomes apparent that jurisdiction is lacking.” Sweeton v. Brown, 27 F.3d 1162, 1169 (6thCir. 1994).
District courts have jurisdiction over civil actions: 1) between citizens of different states where the matter in controversy exceeds the sum or value of $75, 000.00, exclusive of interest and costs, or 2) alleging the deprivation of a constitutional right or a violation of the laws and treaties of the United States. 28 U.S.C. §§ 1331, 1332(a)(1). In this case plaintiff Sanders has failed to assert federal subject matter jurisdiction either by diversity of citizenship or federal question. Lacking jurisdiction, this court must dismiss the action.
It is hereby ORDERED that plaintiff William Sanders’ application to proceed without prepayment of fees is GRANTED.
It is further ORDERED that the complaint is DISMISSED for lack of federal subject matter jurisdiction.
I hereby certify that a copy of the foregoing document was served upon the parties of record on this date, June 2, ...