IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 00-40196 Summary Calendar

THOMAS V. MILLER,

Plaintiff-Appellant,

versus

FIRST NATIONAL BANK OF VAN ALSTYNE, TEXAS; ROBERT H. HYNDS, Trustee; HYNDS & GORDON LAW FIRM,

Defendants-Appellees.

-------------------- Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Texas USDC No. 4:99-CV-257 -------------------- April 2, 2001

Before SMITH, BENAVIDES, and DENNIS, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:*

Thomas V. Miller argues that the district court erred in

granting the defendants’ motion to dismiss his complaint for lack

of subject matter jurisdiction and for failure to state a claim

upon which relief can be granted because his claims that the

defendants defrauded him of his property have not been fully

litigated in any forum. Miller argues that he was entitled to have

a jury trial on the factual issues raised in his complaint.

* Pursuant to 5TH CIR. R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH CIR. R. 47.5.4. No. 00-40196 -2-

Miller failed to carry his burden of establishing a basis for

the district court to exercise its federal subject matter

jurisdiction. See Stockman v. FEC,

, 151 (5th Cir.

1998). His complaint reflected that the parties were not diverse,

and it failed to raise a federal question issue. See

, 1332, 1343. Therefore, the district court lacked subject

matter jurisdiction over the case.

Miller’s appeal failed to raise an issue of arguable merit,

and, accordingly, is DISMISSED as frivolous. See 5th Cir. R. 42.2;

Howard v. King,

(5th Cir. 1983).

Miller’s four motions for order to investigate theft by Van

Alstyne Police & Texas Ranger and his motion to reopen the judgment

are DENIED.

The appellees’ motion for attorney’s fees and double costs

under Fed. R. App. P. 38 is GRANTED, and the case is REMANDED to

the district court to determine the amount of reasonable attorney’s

fees incurred on appeal. The appellees should submit a bill of

costs to the Clerk of this court.

The court warns Miller that additional frivolous suits or

appeals filed by him or on his behalf will invite further

sanctions.

APPEAL DISMISSED; SANCTIONS IMPOSED.