United States District Court, E.D. Louisiana
ORDER AND REASONS
SARAH S. VANCE, District Judge.
Defendants President Barack Obama, former Presidents George H. Bush, George W. Bush, and William Clinton, former United States Attorneys General Eric Holder, John Ashcroft, Alberto Gonzales and Michael Mukasey, the United States Department of Justice, and the United States Federal Court System move to dismiss plaintiff Vicki McLean's claims under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b)(1) and 12(b)(6). The Court grants defendants' motions because the Court does not have jurisdiction over plaintiff's claims.
Plaintiff, proceeding pro se, filed the instant suit levying several allegations against various branches of the Federal Government. The gravamen of plaintiff's suit is that all defendants "conspired together in racketeering activities" to:
(1) murder plaintiff's husband, James McLean, in order to steal his designs for the "High Frequency Active Aurora Program, " a "weather modification system" used by the Department of Defense to "create the Japan earthquake on 3/11/2011;"
(2) launder money from the United States Medicare and Medicaid funds;
(3) "financially and physically attack" plaintiff, including several alleged assassination attempts; and
(4) prohibit plaintiff from disclosing defendants' activities by interfering with plaintiff's court filings and by stabbing her previous attorney.
Plaintiff seeks monetary damages for all of these alleged harms.
Defendants now move to dismiss plaintiff's claims under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b)(1) arguing that the Court lacks subject matter jurisdiction. In the alternative, defendants argue that plaintiff has failed to plead a claim upon which relief may be granted under Rule 12(b)(6).
II. Standard of Review
Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b)(1) permits dismissal for lack of jurisdiction over the subject matter of a claim. In ruling on a Rule 12(b)(1) motion to dismiss, the Court may rely on (1) the complaint alone, presuming the allegations to be true, (2) the complaint supplemented by undisputed facts, or (3) the complaint supplemented by undisputed facts and by the court's resolution of disputed facts. Den Norske Stats Ojeselskap As v. HeereMac Vof, 241 F.3d 420, 424 (5th Cir. 2001); see also Marrera-Montenegro v. United States, 74 F.3d 657, 659 (5th Cir. 1996). The party asserting jurisdiction bears the burden of establishing that the district court possesses jurisdiction. Ramming v. United States, 281 F.3d 158, 161 (5th Cir. 2001).
When, as here, grounds for dismissal may exist under both Rule 12(b)(1) and Rule 12(b)(6), the Court should dismiss only under the former without reaching the question of failure to state a claim. See Hitt v. Pasadena, 561 F.2d 606, 608 (5th Cir. 1977). Because the Court finds that plaintiff's claim must be dismissed under ...