Brown v. JP Morgan Chase & Co.

Background

D’AMONTE BROWN filed the action without a lawyer and was proceeding without paying the filing fee. He sued JP MORGAN CHASE & CO. and JP MORGAN CHASE.COM. He invoked both federal-question jurisdiction and diversity jurisdiction. The amended complaint referred generally to “consumer rights” and “creditors rights” and listed the Equal Credit Opportunity Act, the Federal Trade Commission Act, and 19 U.S.C. § 1592. Brown also attached emails demanding $3,872,400, a credit card with a $10,000 limit, and a $45,000 loan.

The court had previously dismissed the original complaint because it did not comply with federal pleading rules and did not show that the court had subject-matter jurisdiction. The court allowed Brown to file an amended complaint and provide factual support.

Court’s Analysis

The court explained that Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 8 requires a complaint to provide a short and plain statement showing that the plaintiff is entitled to relief. A complaint must contain enough factual allegations to make a claim plausible, rather than relying on labels, conclusions, or general assertions.

The court concluded that the amended complaint still did not allege sufficient facts to state a plausible claim. Brown did not explain what the defendants did or failed to do that violated his rights under state or federal law. The complaint also did not clearly identify where or when any alleged violation occurred or explain how the defendants were legally responsible. The court therefore found that the amended complaint did not cure the deficiencies identified in the earlier dismissal order.

Disposition

The court dismissed Brown’s complaint for lack of subject-matter jurisdiction under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(h)(3). It declined to grant further leave to amend because it determined that the defects could not be cured by amendment. The court directed the clerk to enter judgment. It also certified under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(3) that any appeal would not be taken in good faith and denied Brown status to pursue an appeal without paying the filing fee.