Rondon v. Conley et al, No. 1:2012cv00233 - Document 2 (N.D. Ohio 2012)

Court Description: Memorandum Opinion and Order dismissing this action as the Complaint does not contain allegations remotely suggesting Plaintiff might have a valid federal claim...(more), re 1 Complaint, filed by Israel Rondon. Judge Christopher A. Boyko on 2/17/2012. (M,M)

Download PDF
Rondon v. Conley et al Doc. 2 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF OHIO ISRAEL RONDON, Plaintiff, v. COLENE S. CONLEY, et al., Defendants. ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) CASE NO. 1:12 CV 233 JUDGE CHRISTOPHER A. BOYKO MEMORANDUM OF OPINION AND ORDER On January 31, 2012, Plaintiff pro se Israel Rondon filed this action against Colene S. Conley, “Ordinance 600.12,” Middleburg Heights, Ohio Building Department, the State of Ohio, and “United States of America - Admiralty.” While the Complaint is unclear, Plaintiff appears to assert in general that Defendants do not possess legitimate authority. Principles requiring generous construction of pro se pleadings are not without limits. Beaudett v. City of Hampton, 775 F.2d 1274, 1277 (4th Cir. 1985). Given the most liberal construction, the Complaint does not contain allegations remotely suggesting Plaintiff might have a valid federal claim, or even that there is a reasonable basis for this Court’s jurisdiction. This case is therefore appropriately subject to summary dismissal. Apple v. Glenn, 183 F.3d 477 (6th Cir. 1999); see, Hagans v. Lavine, 415 U.S. 528, 536-37 (1974)(citing numerous Supreme Court cases for the proposition that attenuated or unsubstantial claims divest the district court of jurisdiction); see also, In re Bendectin Litig., 857 F.2d 290, 300 (6th Cir.1988)(recognizing that federal question jurisdiction is divested by unsubstantial claims). Dockets.Justia.com Accordingly, this action is dismissed. IT IS SO ORDERED. S/Christopher A. Boyko CHRISTOPHER A. BOYKO UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE February 17, 2012 -2-

Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.