Johnson-El v. Obrotka

Background

Jeremiah Johnson-El, representing himself, brought claims against Jim Obrotka alleging harassment and stalking arising from a traffic ticket citation. The court considered an August 26, 2025 Report and Recommendation by Magistrate Judge Ona T. Wang. That report recommended dismissing all of Johnson-El’s claims with prejudice on several grounds, including improper service, improper removal, lack of subject-matter jurisdiction, and failure to prosecute. It also recommended denying Johnson-El’s motion to enforce an injunctive order expeditiously.

Jurisdiction

Neither party objected to the Report and Recommendation, so the court reviewed it for clear error. The court agreed with the report’s analysis that federal-question jurisdiction was lacking because the underlying traffic citation was purely a matter of state law. The court also agreed that diversity jurisdiction was lacking because the parties appeared to be citizens of New York. Subject-matter jurisdiction is the court’s legal power to hear a case, and the court concluded that this power was absent here.

Ruling

The court adopted the Report and Recommendation only to the extent it found no subject-matter jurisdiction. It dismissed Johnson-El’s complaint without prejudice for lack of subject-matter jurisdiction, contrary to the report’s recommendation of dismissal with prejudice. Because the court lacked jurisdiction, it did not reach the report’s other proposed grounds for dismissal. The court directed the Clerk to mail Johnson-El a copy of the decision and close the case. The court also stated that the parties’ failure to object waived appellate review, as the Report and Recommendation had warned.