United States Court of Appeals

FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT ___________

No. 97-2430 ___________

Mel M. Marin, * * Appellant, * * Appeal from the United States v. * District Court for the Eastern * District of Missouri. LDDS of Missouri, Inc., doing * business as LDDS of Alabama, Inc.; * WorldCom, Inc., * * [UNPUBLISHED] Appellees. * ___________

Submitted: January 5, 1998 Filed: January 12, 1998 ___________

Before WOLLMAN, LOKEN, and HANSEN, Circuit Judges. ___________

PER CURIAM.

Mel M. Marin appeals from the district court&s1dismissal of his diversity action. In August 1996, Marin filed suit against LDDS of Missouri, Inc. d/b/a LDDS of Alabama, Inc., and WorldCom, Inc. (collectively WorldCom), claiming breach of contract, fraud, and invasion of privacy. The district court, on WorldCom&s Federal

1 The Honorable E. Richard Webber, United States District Judge for the Eastern District of Missouri. Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b)(1) motion, dismissed Marin&s complaint without prejudice for failure to establish subject matter jurisdiction.

Upon de novo review, see Keene Corp. v. Cass, 908 F.2d 293, 296 (8th Cir. 1990), we agree with the district court that Marin failed to establish subject matter jurisdiction, see Bilal v. Kaplan, 904 F.2d 14, 15 (8th Cir. 1990) (per curiam) (federal question jurisdiction must appear clearly and distinctly; “mere suggestion of a federal question is not sufficient to establish the jurisdiction of federal courts”); Sanders v. Clemco Indus., 823 F.2d 214, 216 (8th Cir. 1987) (complaint must state with specificity corporate party&s state of incorporation and principal place of business; where plaintiff fails to state place of incorporation or principal place of business of corporate party, pleadings are inadequate to establish diversity). We have also considered and reject Marin&s remaining arguments on appeal as without merit.

Accordingly, the judgment of the district court is affirmed.

A true copy.

Attest:

CLERK, U.S. COURT OF APPEALS, EIGHTH CIRCUIT.

-2-