UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA

FILED

JUL l l 2014 Lonay Sharday Newkirk, Clerk, U.S. District and B*"kNPtcy Courts Plaintiff, v. Civil Action No. \LP ..- l q

Mr. Raspberry et al.,

Defendants.

\_/\q./\.,/\_/\\_/\q.¢/\_/\¢_/\\_J\-,/

MEMORANDUM OPINION

This matter is before the Court on plaintiffs pro se complaint and application to proceed in forma pauperis. The Court will grant the plaintiffs application and dismiss the complaint for lack of subject matter jurisdiction.

The subject matter jurisdiction of the federal district courts is limited and is set forth generally at

and ]332. Under those statutes, federal jurisdiction is available only when a "federal question" is presented or the parties are of diverse citizenship and the amount in controversy exceeds $75,000. A party seeking relief in the district court must at least plead facts that bring the suit within the court's jurisdiction. See Fed. R. Civ. P. S(a). Failure to plead such facts warrants dismissal of the action. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 12(}1)(3).

Plaintiff is a District of Columbia resident suing three individuals who appear to work at a program based in the District of Columbia. Plaintiff accuses one defendant of sexual harassment; she does not allege that the other two individuals engaged in misconduct. Other

than stating “HELP," C0mpl. at 2, plaintiff has not demanded any relief. The complaint presents

neither a federal question nor a basis for diversity jurisdiction Hence, this case will be dismissed without prejudice A separate Order accompanies this Memorandum Opinion.

Un’ited State%l District Judge DATE; my j , 2014