Opinion
Civil Action No. 12 1845
11-14-2012
ASHEP NETER EL, Plaintiff, v. UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Defendant.
MEMORANDUM OPINION
This matter is before the Court on plaintiff's application to proceed in forma pauperis and his pro se complaint. For the reasons stated below, the Court will grant the application and dismiss the complaint.
According to plaintiff, "THE SUPERIOR COURT OF THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA is in want of Jurisdiction regarding CASE NUMBER 2012CMD9394." Compl. at 2. He purports to remove the case to this court. See id. A defendant in "any civil action brought in a State court of which the district courts of the United States have original jurisdiction" may remove the action to a federal district court. 28 U.S.C. § 1441(a). Removal here is not appropriate for two reasons. First, the Superior Court action to which plaintiff refers is a criminal action, not a civil action. Second, it is the well settled doctrine that federal courts should not enjoin or otherwise interfere with ongoing proceedings in the Superior Court. See Younger v. Harris, 401 U.S. 37, 45 (1971) ("[T]he normal thing to do when federal courts are asked to enjoin pending proceedings in state courts is not to issue such injunctions."); JMM Corp. v. District of Columbia, 378 F.3d 1117, 1120-22 (D.C. Cir. 2004) (applying Younger rule to proceedings in the District of Columbia); Bannum, Inc. v. District of Columbia, 433 F. Supp. 2d 1, 3 (D.D.C. 2006) (declining to intervene to vacate a Superior Court order).
According to the Superior Court docket, plaintiff has been charged with possession of a controlled substance, a misdemeanor, and that a non-jury trial is set for November 13, 2012.
An Order is issued separately.
_______________
United States District Judge