United States District Court, D. Massachusetts
ORDER AND REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION
PAGE KELLEY UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE.
reasons set forth below, the Court grants plaintiff's
motion to proceed in forma pauperis, orders the
Clerk's Office to reassign the case to a District Judge,
and recommends that the District Judge dismiss this action
for lack of subject matter jurisdiction. I. RELEVANT
BACKGROUND On March 20, 2019, plaintiff Michael Arroyo,
a resident of Franklin, Massachusetts, filed a self-prepared
complaint against Spirit Airlines and Boston Logan
International Airport. See Complaint
(“Compl.”), Docket No. 1. This action was
assigned pursuant to the Court's Program for Random
Assignment of Civil Cases to Magistrate Judges.
complaint states that “[t]his is a criminal complaint
on poor disrespectful treatment that [plaintiff] received as
a respectable human on the property of Boston Logan
International Airport and also on the commercial airplane
flight property of Spirit Airlines.” Compl. at p. 1. As
best can be gleaned from the pleadings, on March 12, 2019,
Arroyo boarded a Spirit Airlines flight out of Boston,
Massachusetts, bound for Orlando, Florida. Id. at p.
7. While waiting to board the flight, plaintiff alleges that
he “was criminally paraded by criminal disrespectful
public humans.” Id. Plaintiff alleges that he
was mistreated by TSA security and that employees of the
airport were “silently criminally disrespectful to
[plaintiff].” Id. at p. 2. For relief,
plaintiff seeks “legal compensation for the nonsense
that [plaintiff] was put through on their commercial
Procedural Order dated March 22, 2019, Arroyo was directed
either to pay the filing fee or file a fee-waiver
application. See Docket No. 3. Now before the Court
are Arroyo's Motion for Leave to Proceed in forma
pauperis and Application to Proceed in District Court
without Prepaying Fees or Costs. See Docket Nos.
PROCEEDINGS IN FORMA PAUPERIS
review of the plaintiff's motion to proceed in forma
pauperis, the Court concludes that he is without income
or assets to pay the $400.00 filing fee. His application is
STANDARD OF REVIEW
courts have limited jurisdiction, “and the requirement
of subject-matter jurisdiction ‘functions as a
restriction on federal power.'” Fafel v.
Dipaola, 399 F.3d 403, 410 (1st Cir. 2005) (quoting
Insurance Corp. of Ireland v. Compagnie des Bauxites de
Guinee, 456 U.S. 694, 702 (1982)). Federal district
courts may exercise jurisdiction over civil actions arising
under federal law, see 28 U.S.C. § 1331
(“§ 1331”), and over certain actions in
which the parties are of diverse citizenship and the amount
in controversy exceeds $75, 000, see 28 U.S.C.
§ 1332 (“§ 1332”).
plaintiff who seeks to bring his suit in a federal forum
bears the burden of establishing that the federal court has
subject-matter jurisdiction. See Gordo-González v.
United States, 873 F.3d 32, 35 (1st Cir. 2017).
“If the court determines at any time that it lacks
subject-matter jurisdiction, the court must dismiss the
action.” Fed.R.Civ.P. 12(h)(3). In conducting this
review, the Court liberally construes the plaintiff's
complaint because he is proceeding pro se. See Haines v.
Kerner, 404 U.S. 519, 520-21 (1972).
the Court cannot discern a basis for subject-matter
jurisdiction. Diversity subject-matter jurisdiction does not
exist because the parties are not of “diverse
citizenship.” Federal question subject-matter
jurisdiction is also absent because the complaint does not
identify a federal right the defendants are alleged to have
violated. To the extent plaintiff seeks to file a criminal
complaint, he does not have standing to bring a criminal
action because no statute authorizes him to do so. Kennan
v. McGrath, 328 F.2d 610, 611 (1st Cir.1964) (per
curiam). Under the United States Constitution, it is the
Executive Branch of the federal government, and not the
Judicial Branch, that is responsible for conducting criminal
investigations, and bringing criminal charges, if warranted.
ORDER FOR REASSIGNMENT
foregoing reasons, this Court orders the Clerk's Office
to reassign this action to a District Judge for further