Ali v. American University of Antigua, Inc.

Background

Mohamed Abo Ali, proceeding without a lawyer, sued American University of Antigua, Inc. (AUA) and Manipal Education Americas, LLC (MEA). He invoked diversity jurisdiction and alleged that the defendants withheld his medical diploma and transcript after issues arose concerning federal student-loan disbursements and a proposed private loan. He alleged that he owed $53,000 and that he needed the documents for certification required to begin a medical residency.

Ali sought damages, declaratory relief, and immediate orders requiring the defendants to release his diploma and other documents to the Educational Commission for Foreign Medical Graduates. He also sought an order prohibiting retaliation. The court had previously allowed him to proceed without paying filing fees.

Federal-question jurisdiction

The court concluded that Ali had not pleaded facts establishing federal-question jurisdiction. Although he referred to due process, the court found those allegations conclusory and said the allegations appeared to arise from state-law violations rather than federal law. The court also stated that, to the extent Ali intended to bring constitutional claims under 42 U.S.C. § 1983, those claims would fail because AUA and MEA are private entities and he had not alleged facts showing that they acted under color of state law.

Diversity jurisdiction

The court also found that the complaint did not adequately establish diversity jurisdiction. Ali alleged that he was a citizen of New Jersey, that AUA was incorporated in Florida and had its campus in Antigua, and that MEA was a New York limited liability company. But the complaint did not identify the citizenship of MEA’s members, which is required to determine an LLC’s citizenship. The court also found that Ali had not alleged facts showing that the amount in controversy exceeded $75,000; the complaint identified a $53,000 tuition balance.

Venue

The court found that the complaint did not adequately show that the Southern District of New York was a proper venue. Ali’s allegations about AUA’s headquarters and principal offices in New York were inconsistent or conclusory, and he did not identify where in New York his clinical rotations occurred. The court therefore could not determine whether a substantial part of the events or omissions occurred in that district.

Disposition

The court dismissed the action for lack of subject-matter jurisdiction under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(h)(3), but granted Ali 30 days to file an amended complaint. The amended complaint must include facts supporting federal-question or diversity jurisdiction and showing that the Southern District of New York is a proper venue. The court did not address the requests for immediate injunctive relief unless and until Ali files an amended complaint addressing these defects. The court also certified that an appeal would not be taken in good faith and denied fee-waiver status for an appeal. The clerk was directed to keep the matter open until judgment is entered.