Arthur S. Curtis, Appellant, v. Wolf-lenkin Limited Partnership, Appellee, 988 F.2d 1280 (D.C. Cir. 1993)

This appeal was considered on the record from the United States District Court for the District of Columbia and on the briefs filed by the parties. The court has determined that the issues presented occasion no need for a published opinion. See D.C. Cir. Rule 14(c). It is therefore

ORDERED and ADJUDGED that the judgment from which this appeal has been taken be affirmed. Because the appellant and one of the appellee's limited partners are residents of the same state, complete diversity of citizenship is absent and the district court lacked subject-matter jurisdiction over the action. See Carden v. Arkoma Assocs., 494 U.S. 185 (1990). This jurisdictional defect cannot be waived. Pennsylvania v. Union Gas Co., 491 U.S. 1, 25 (1989) (" [T]he cases are legion holding that a party may not waive a defect in subject-matter jurisdiction or invoke federal jurisdiction simply by consent."). Accordingly the district court properly dismissed the action for lack of subject-matter jurisdiction.

The clerk is directed to withhold issuance of the mandate herein until seven days after disposition of any timely petition for rehearing. See D.C. Cir. Rule 15(b).