EFTA00010474.pdf

Type: pdf
Source set: data-set-8
Extracted text

Case 9:08-cv-80736-KAM Document 205-2 Entered on FLSD Docket 07/05/2013 Page 1 of 20 
Appendix B 
EFTA00010474


Case 9:08-cv-80736-KAM Document 205-2 Entered on FLSD Docket 07/05/2013 Page 2 of 20 
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 
SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA 
CASE NO. 08-80736-CIV-MARRA/JOHNSON 
JANE DOE #1 AND JANE DOE #2, 
Petitioners, 
vs. 
UNITED STATES, 
Respondent. 
UNITED STATES' SEALED MOTION TO DISMISS 
FOR LACK OF SUBJECT MATTER JURISDICTION 
The United States hereby requests that this Court enter an order dismissing these 
proceedings and the Petition for Enforcement of Crime Victim's Rights Act, 18 U.S.C. Section 
3771 (DE I, the "Petition"), through which Petitioners Jane Doe #1 and Jane Doe #2 have 
advanced claims pursuant to the Crime Victims' Rights Act ("CVRA"), for lack of subject 
matter jurisdiction.1 
This Court lacks subject matter jurisdiction over the Petition because 
See, e.g., Gntpo Dataflux v. Atlas Global Group, L.P., 541 U.S. 567, 571 (2004) 
("Challenges to subject-matter jurisdiction can of course be raised at any time prior to final 
judgment."); United States v. Giraldo-Prado, 150 F.3d 1328, 1329 (11th Cir. 1998) (recognizing 
that "a party may raise jurisdiction at any time during the pendency of the proceedings"); Harrell 
& Sumner Contracting Co. v. Peabody Petersen Co., 546 F.2d 1227, 1229 (5th Cir. 1977) 
("[U]nder Rule 12(h)(3), Fed.R.Civ.P., the defense of lack of subject matter jurisdiction may be 
raised at any time by motion of a party or otherwise."); see also Fed. R. Civ. P. 12(h)(3). In the 
present motion, the United States seeks dismissal of Petitioners' claims based on both a legal and 
factual challenge to the Court's subject matter jurisdiction. This Court may properly consider 
and weigh evidence beyond Petitioners' allegations when evaluating such a challenge to the 
Court's subject matter jurisdiction: 
Factual attacks [on a Court's subject matter jurisdiction] ... "challenge subject 
matter jurisdiction in fact…
Open in the interactive archive →