In re: Misbah Abdul-Kareem
In re: Misbah Abdul-Kareem
Trial Court Opinion
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF MINNESOTA
In re: MISBAH ABDUL-KAREEM Civil No. 18-cv-2923 (SRN/HB) ORDER
On November 27, 2018, this action was dismissed for lack of jurisdiction and Judgment was entered. See Doc. Nos. 4, 5. Specifically, the Court adopted the recommendation of the Magistrate Judge to dismiss this matter because the presumed- Complaint filed by Abdul-Kareem, titled “A sworn and written statement in regards to my Money Project of 2017” [Doc. No. 1], failed to state a legal controversy.
On December 4, 2018, the Court received a one-page Motion from Abdul-Kareem, entitled “To Continue and also Re-State the Defendant while explaining my Legal ‘Controversy.’” [Doc. No. 6.] In the motion, Abdul-Kareem sets forth additional information about his “Money Project,” but fails to explain how he has standing to bring the action or what relief he seeks from the Court. “Article III restricts federal courts to the resolution of cases and controversies.” Davis v. FEC, 554 U.S. 724, 732 (2008). As such, the motion must be denied.
Accordingly, based upon all the files, records and proceedings herein, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the Motion to Continue [Doc. No. 6] is DENIED.
Dated: March 5, 2019 s/Susan Richard Nelson SUSAN RICHARD NELSON United States District Judge
Trial Court Opinion
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF MINNESOTA
In re: MISBAH ABDUL-KAREEM Civil No. 18-cv-2923 (SRN/HB) ORDER
On November 27, 2018, this action was dismissed for lack of jurisdiction and Judgment was entered. See Doc. Nos. 4, 5. Specifically, the Court adopted the recommendation of the Magistrate Judge to dismiss this matter because the presumed- Complaint filed by Abdul-Kareem, titled “A sworn and written statement in regards to my Money Project of 2017” [Doc. No. 1], failed to state a legal controversy.
On December 4, 2018, the Court received a one-page Motion from Abdul-Kareem, entitled “To Continue and also Re-State the Defendant while explaining my Legal ‘Controversy.’” [Doc. No. 6.] In the motion, Abdul-Kareem sets forth additional information about his “Money Project,” but fails to explain how he has standing to bring the action or what relief he seeks from the Court. “Article III restricts federal courts to the resolution of cases and controversies.” Davis v. FEC, 554 U.S. 724, 732 (2008). As such, the motion must be denied.
Accordingly, based upon all the files, records and proceedings herein, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the Motion to Continue [Doc. No. 6] is DENIED.
Dated: March 5, 2019 s/Susan Richard Nelson SUSAN RICHARD NELSON United States District Judge
Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.